Looking to 1953

There's a really interesting, and scary, article on Salon right now which consists of an interview of Joe Walsh.

For those who don't recall him, Walsh was a Republican who ran against Trump.  He'd been a Tea Party Republican who was an early defector in opposition to Trump and, apparently, has remained there.  Indeed, he was associated with Trump allies before he bolted to sound a warning against Trump, which he's still trying to sound.

The reason I note this is that the article, while it definitely has its flaws, is insightful and, for anyone reading this blog, probably a little familiar.  A lot of what he's warning about has been addressed here.

Walsh's main point, and its a good one, is that Trump populists have an existential view of the world that's fundamentally such that it's become unapologetically anti-democratic. Therefore, those who have the view that once Trumpites learn what really occurred in regard to the November 2020 election, i.e., it wasn't stolen, or what really occurred on January 6, i.e. it was an insurrection, that they will change their mind and oppose Trump are simply wrong.  The reason for that is that their Weltanschauung is such that Trumpites view their opponents as existentially illegitimate.

That's a really scary point, but its correct in large measure.  And he's correct on how we got there. . . in part, and also, not in part.

Walsh takes the view that going back to the Southern Strategy of Ronald Reagan, without every mentioning Reagan, the GOP adopted, or rather co-opted, this view, for its own purposes.  That's' partially correct.  And he's definitely correct when he notes that the Trumpites know that they were completely ignored in their concerns by generations of American politicians, left and right.  And like we've said, by voting for Trump in 2016 they were voting to throw in the match and burn the system down.  Like we also said at that time and since, if Bernie Sanders had been the Democratic candidate in 2016 (and frankly, maybe 2020)  he would be President now.  Sanders appealed to the exact same base.  

And as we've also noted, by choosing Uber Establishment Hilary Clinton, the Democrats blew it.

What we've noted, but what the article doesn't, is that the roots of this go back further than the 1976 election.  They go back at least to the 1960s when fundamental long established aspects of western culture came under surfaced attacks from the left.  Animosity in some part of the left to western culture had existed for almost all of the 20th Century, but they had not been able to emerge into mainstream political and cultural discourse until after World War Two.  Part of that attack came in other ways right after the war, and we've been dealing with another in our series on an attack on the culture that came from another quarter.  As we have noted before, the war did something that set things up in some fashion for what occurred in the 60s.  But it was the massive introduction of new wealth, combined with an expansion of the economy, combined with the Vietnam War that really exploded into a left wing eruption in the culture by the fateful year of 1968.  The article misses that.

The hard hat reaction to 1968 existed in that very year.  But the elite drift to the left, which had been going on since the 1950s, really accelerated at that time and the left, using the courts, started gaining ground in the 1970s to force cultural changes up on the country through litigation, not through the ballot box, where the ballot box would not suffice, or seem to suffice.  As also noted here before, such decisions really do not tend to really fix an issue in the public's mind immediately, and sometimes not at all.  Combined with that, in the 1970s, the American economy began to fundamentally change with nothing done to stop it. Both Democrats and Republicans winked at manufacturing jobs, particularly low tech manufacturing jobs, going overseas, confident in the view that what this would undoubtedly mean is the arrival of high paying replacement jobs that everyone wanted.

Walsh puts this in terms of "1953", more or less arguing that populist Republicans seek to return the country to its status, economically certainly, but culturally also, that it had in 1953.  His analysis is sophisticated in some sense, and not in others.  In one way he gets it correct that contrary to what the press asserts, outward racism isn't part of it, but at the same time the sense that the "perfect" world of 1953 was a white one.

More accurately, of course, the United States of 1953 had a white protestant culture.  The Catholic Ghetto was still very much a thing in 1953 and Catholics were attending university for the first time.  And the big advancements in civil rights for African Americans were very much part of the story of the 1950s, although that may be part of it too, as almost all Americans look back on that as a success.  1953 was during the era in which American industry dominated the world without question, although 53 is an odd choice as the Korean War, which was not actually a popular one, was ongoing.  Having said that, the Vietnam War was yet to occur.

1953 was the year in which Playboy magazine premiered and the assault on the traditional family really, therefore, began in earnest.  It was also, however, during an era in which most men, including men with no college degree, could support a family without anyone else in it making an outside income.  That era has very much passed.

Of course, the irony of an idealized pass is both that it never actually matches the reality of  the past or the current lives of those who advocate for it.  Many in the populist camp look back on this prior era strongly romantically, however, and Walsh is correct. The desire is to return the culture to something like that era.

A desire to return to past standard, or even some of them, is not in and of itself anti-democratic or illegitimate.  Globally, strongly conservative, and not just populist, movements often have varying elements of that as a goal. Certainly the American conservative movement, at least weakly, had that as a goal to some extent for some time.  The problem becomes when the mindset of some with such goals reduces them both to myth, and strongly endorses a conspiratorial view of their opponents.  Liberals, in taking to the courts, were not engaging in conspiracies, although there were always some extreme left wingers who acted somewhat hidden goals that they were advancing incrementally.  The problem that the left, and the larger society right and left, now has is that its overarchingly difficult for those outside of the populist right to grasp that many in that section of the electorate have convinced themselves that what was done was completely illegitimate and that those who took those positions are illegitimate as well.

With that view, the Trumpites, and they vary enormously in loyalty and world view, go from being somewhat predisposed to believe that the left would resort to stealing an election all the way to believing that views outside of their own are so fundamentally flawed as to be irrelevant.  The big problem is the question of to what degree do the latter makeup the GOP today.  Seemingly, in some quarters at least, they're driving the party.

Given that, as noted in the article, the hope that the sun will come out, people will look around, and return to their democratic senses, as seems to be the hope in the left and center, may well be a forlorn hope for at least the time being.  What's the way out of a danger for democracy if this is the point we've reached?

Ironically, the answer may be in part the same way we got here.  In spite of the whining and crying about them, the current Supreme Court seems intent on dismantling "progress" by judicial decree, and leaving that, whatever that is, up to the state legislatures and Congress.  If distrusts of the parties and the government started with the courts, which it did to some extent, maybe this will start to restore it.  The problem still is, however, that it took us around fifty years to get to this point.  Getting back. . . well there may not be fifty years to do it.

And even if there is, are there enough on the right and left from whom democracy is the first principal, to get there?

Blog Mirror: Just Another Day On the Prairie. Thoughts on "Freedom Day" and the spirit of the times.

I really hesitate to post this, as I don't want it to seem to be some sort of an endorsement.  I'm copying it over as a link for another reason.

Freedom Day

This is from the following blog:

Just Another Day On The Prairie

The diary and musings of an Alberta ranch wife.

So, what of it?

I like this blog as the photos on it are beautiful.  

And also, as a Wyomingite, and a rural one, and an agricultural one in one of my three vocations/avocations, Alberta is part of the same region I'm from, different country though it is.

Indeed, I sometimes think Easterners don't really grasp that in a lot of ways, natives of the Rocky Mountain Region and the Prairie states have more in common with the Canadian western provinces than they do with any other region of their own country.  Indeed, they have quite a bit in common with the highly rural ares of northern Mexico as well, but they very much do with western Canada.

Rural Western Canadians are part of the exact same agricultural/livestock/hunting/rural culture that real Western Americans, not imports from other regions, including quite frankly the South, are from.  Indeed, ranching in Alberta has the same roots as ranching in Wyoming, Montana and Colorado do.  At one time ranchers went back and forth across the border as if it wasn't there.  Many of Charles Russell's paintings of ranch life are actually set in Alberta, not Montana.

So not too surprisingly, rural Albertans, and rural Canadians from much of the rest of the Canadian West, have the same views that rural Western Americans do.

This isn't really true, I'd note, of Canadians as a whole. While I don't mention it often, I'm a dual citizen and hold Canadian as well as American citizenship, but my Canadian relatives are all Eastern Canadians by origin, and their views are extremely different on many things than Western Americans' are.

Now, I mean to be careful here, as I do not wish to offer insult.

When I speak of the views of Wyomingites, Montanans, and rural Coloradans, etc., I'm speaking of their views.  I'm not speaking of the views of Texans and Oklahomans.

I'm not slamming Texans and Oklahomans here.

I'm noting this, because we're an oil province here, we have lots of people here, from time to time, who come from the oil provinces of Texas and Oklahoma.  Interestingly, as Alberta and Saskatchewan are also oil provinces, we also have quite a few people from these regions who make an appearance as well, although they don't tend to have much of an influence on local culture and politics.  Indeed, they're pretty quiet on both, and they'd nearly have to be on the latter, as of course they can't vote after being here a year. Texans and Oklahomans can, of course.  I note this as during oil booms the latter groups tend to be somewhat influential in local politics, and often their local views are imported.  Canadians in the US tend to be really quiet if they're not in numbers.

Canadians in Canada are not, and to a fair degree, prior to COVID 19 Canadians were expressing a fair amount of contempt for American culture.  Donald Trump really brought it on.^[1]

Note, I'm still not commenting on any of this.

What I will note is that open contempt tend to inspire contempt back, and people should be careful about that.

Anyhow, what I"m now noting is that Western Canada has had, for a long time, the same relationship with the Canadian East that the Western United States tend to with our East, and this entry really shows that.  Note:

This Convoy is not just for the truckers mandates. It’s for the 30 million people that Trudeaus government approved to allowed to be spied on their cell phones. It’s for the family members banned from visiting family in nursing homes. It’s for the censorship on all social media platforms. It’s for all the people afraid to speak In fear of being called conspiracy theorists. It’s for the people who didn’t want to give up their freedom of choice! It’s for the people who don’t want to give up their right to bear arms. It’s for the people who don’t want to be in debt for the next 100 years. 

Did you just read a Canadian post referencing a "right to bear arms".

Yes you did.

Now, this post also deals with a lot of other things, and as is typically the case, most Americans are going to be completely clueless about what's going on.  We don't tend to follow Canadian news here, and we don't tend to get it.  Both are inexcusable.

I do, or at least I used to. With the news being what it is recently, I've grown a bit numb to it.  Well, really numb.  I was aware, vaguely, that something was going on, but not that aware.  I had to look it up.

I looked it up on the BBC.

The BBC's Toronto reporter notes (original font, bold text and mother tongue speallings):

After a week-long drive across Canada, a convoy of big rigs has arrived in the national capital to protest vaccine mandates and Covid-19 measures. Organisers insist it will be peaceful, but police say they're prepared for trouble.

The article goes on:

The movement was sparked by a vaccine mandate for truckers crossing the US-Canada border, implemented by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's Liberal government earlier this month.

Upset with the new measure that would require unvaccinated Canadian truckers crossing the two nations' boundary to quarantine once they've returned home, a loose coalition of truckers and conservative groups began to organise the cross-country drive that began in western Canada.

It picked up steam and gathered support as it drove east. Many supporters, already opposed to Mr Trudeau and his politics, have grown frustrated with pandemic measures they see as political overreach.

Okay, a couple of things.

I've thought about noting it before, but because we're so focused on our own selves in the US, we tend to view the entire COVID 19 mask and vaccine story as exclusively our own.  Heck, for the most part, if the entire population of the globe had died of COVID 19 it probably would have taken most Americans a couple of weeks to actually notice it.

We tend to be rather self-absorbed.

Part of that self-absorption, however, is our failure to note that a lot of big social and political stores around here are actually international ones  and some of those have widespread regional expression.  

There have been huge mask protests in Australia and parts of Europe, including, for example, Germany. Refusals to vaccinate have occurred in at least Australia and across Europe as well.

Now, I'll note that as I'm not hugely familiar with this story, I don't want to go too far in commenting on it.  I was dimly aware of some provisions in Canada as a friend of mine had recently been to British Columbia, and I'd asked him about things, and he noted mask requirements for where he was, stating beyond that bluntly that Canadians "didn't tolerate stupidity".  That's a very blunt comment, but I'd also note that my Canadian contacts also would not be critical of Prime Minster Trudeau's policies here.  Frankly, I don't know that I am, either.

On that, our luck in our small family finally ran out.  My daughter now has COVID 19.  I'm so weary at this point, I'm not angry, and hopefully it'll be mild.  She's away from home and I can't do anything about it, or even to help.

And I've watched COVID 19 rip through places I know and people I know.  I don't understand the reluctance to get vaccinated at all.  A rancher I vaguely knew died of COVID 19 and left a devastated widow.  A bunch of people who were with him at a cattle sale where he surely picked it up got it and were pretty sick.  My daughter got the disease, potentially, from being exposed to a person who didn't get vaccinated and who went here and there before that person finally had to acknowledge the infection.

None of that had to be.

Maybe we couldn't have beat the virus.  But our refusals made it certain that we could not.  It will go on to become endemic now.  Is Trudeau being unreasonable for trying to keep American infections from spreading back across the border?

Without really commenting on it, this may be the one area where I agree with Trudeau.  I haven't followed Canada's response to COVID 19 now for some time (I did at first) but Canada has had a hard time with the disease. The US started off with a bad start, but Canada somehow fell into a bad situation.

I'll also note that at this point Canadian news in the US started to drop off because, well, Canadians were suddenly less condescending towards the United States than they had been for awhile.  As the weirdeness surrounding the Trump lie that he won an election he lost has caused many in the US to wonder about the future of their democracy, and many outside of the country to wonder the same thing, that's returned a bit.

That might drop off again as Trudeau went into hiding yesterday during the protests. . . shades of insurrection. . . 

Anyhow, as noted, I don't know that I'm not sympathetic to Trudeau's response here to COVID 19.  Truckers are entering a country where the Omicron variant is infecting many and the chances of them bringing it home. . . well, they seem pretty high.

Which will make this the one area where I'll ever say that, most likely.  I don't like Justin Trudeau as a politician, and I never have.  Indeed, I've characterized him as a soy boy at one point.  

It used to be pretty clear that Western Canadians took a much different view of a lot of Canadian politics than Easterners did, and obviously that's still the case. But for that matter, our regional political culture used to be a lot clearer here, too.  Things like gun control have always been hugely unpopular in the rural West, but even here that's gone from "don't mess with me taking my pistol and rifle out in the sticks" to the "we need to be prepared to fight Stalingrad" sort of atmosphere.  And, starting with the campaign which pitted our current Governor against Foster Freiss, you'd have thought that some people were running for the Governor of Alabama in the 1970s.  Freiss' campaign even sported lightly clad young women in a state which has winter about nine months out of the year, which inspires a "geez, doesn't somebody have a coat for those poor girls" type of reaction rather than a "whoa. . . look at those Daisy Dukes".  Underlying it all, however, the old views, by us old residents, are still there.

Globally it seems a lot of the same strains are also at work everywhere.  Populism, something that never had much of an appeal here, has taken over in the state's GOP and across the nation in Republican organizations.  But not just here.  Populism helps explain how Boris Johnson rose to power in the UK.  Populist dominate the Hungarian government, which is strongly right wing.  Populists threaten to take over the Polish government.  Strong populist elements exist in French politics, and you can find populist elements everywhere.

That would seemingly have nothing to do with COVID 19 and it doesn't, but what it does have to do with is politics in the era of COVID, so it gets mixed in. And there's a really strong cultural element at work here that the political left wants to dismiss and even pejoratively label, but it shouldn't.  A big part of what's given rise to right wing populism is a feeling that traditional culture is being attacked.  To some degree, it is being attacked.

That's serious for a lot of reasons, but one of the reasons is that in the US, and elsewhere it would seem, a lot of rank and file people who are of the traditional culture feel that they have nowhere to go democratically.  People who are basically traditionally Western European and Christian in culture are being told that clearly Christian values are obsolete, their inherited European values are wrongheaded if not outright racist, and they just have to lump it, at best.  

A big part of that has been a radical reconstruction of domestic values, which are inherited from a Christian heritage. Christianity has always focused on families as the center of secular life, and took what was the radical view early on that marriage meant one man, one woman, until one of them died.  Pagans didn't believe any of that.

That Christian belief, in part, gave rise to the success of Christianity in spite of huge governmental and cultural repression.  Christian families were solid because of that belief, and Christians cared for their own in times of trouble, even caring for others where they could.  They therefore survived repression, oppression, wars, and plagues in spite of being in cultures that held "don't be stupid, you can abandon the sick. . .don't be stupid, you can kill the infirm. . . don't be stupid, if you are male you can screw who or what you want, and by force if you want."

Now, we're darned near back there in signficant ways, although we certainly didn't arrive at this spot in an instant.  The assault on marriage began as far back, really, as 1534.  It arrived in a flood fashion after World War Two, with that war having damaged so much of Western morality, and achieved legal assistance from, of course, California starting in 1969.

European values, including democratic values, were also inherited from the Church  A body that held that everyone was equal in God's eyes necessarily would spill into the secular world.  Indeed, the poor and common born could and did rise to position in the Church long before that became the case in secular society.^[2]

Western culture is essentially Christian in its values and even non practicing people, and non Christians for that matter, tend to hold Christian philosophical values without realizing it.  One non-Christian friend of mine, but one who lives in the Western world, noted to me once that culturally, "we're all Catholics".  There's a lot of truth to that.

But progressives have been acting for some time now to rip that down and are offering, in its place, a construct based on what individual's "feel", which is not a very solid basis for any sort of larger philosophy.  Reality keeps on keeping on, irrespective of what we feel about it.

And at the same time, progressives have been big on "you must", including what you must think.  It doesn't matter if your moral code holds one thing, if the current progressive view is to the opposite, you must not think that and you must not say that.  Canada has gone a lot further down this road than the U.S.

But that very "feel" and "must" ethos leads us to where we are now, ironically, in regard to the COVID 19 virus and what we feel about it.  While the science is solid as to what it is and how to avoid it, a nearly century long campaign on deconstructing our focus and changing it into one based on what we "feel", as long as we also feel to be consumers, set us up for the current crisis. And that dovetails into the "must".  A group of people who have been told that they "must" think something that is contrary to centuries of their cultural values and their own experiences, because of what we individually feel, is going to lose, at some point, a willingness to accept what its being told, no matter how extremely well founded one particular item may be.

In other words, introducing these same policies in 1950, in a different U.S. and a different Canada, probably wouldn't be provoking this result, as it would have come in the context of little else being under assault.

Whether it's a 500-year attack on our central foundational values, or only a 75-year-long one, at some point we reached a tipping point.  A good case can be made that for the United States that point came in 2015 and I warned at that time that a Supreme Court case in which the Court sought to redefine a traditional view of the world contrary to the long run of human culture would have future dire consequences.  It seems to me that I was proven to be right.  The Court, in its waning liberal days, usurped the legislatures, created a result, and those benefitting from it, as well as those who were on the political left, ran with it far beyond what was predicted, including what its author predicted.  Where as that result only took one more step on a road that had mile markers at 1534, 1953, 1963, 1968, and 1969, it seems to have been a societal bridge too far.  The same movement had already made large impacts across the globe legislatively, making the US somewhat unique in that it was done judicially.

It is not what a person thinks of that movement per se, but rather what occurs when a very large percentage of the population gets the sense, even just vaguely, that it's being attacked and has no place to go.  In the case of the US, a large, formerly Democratic demographic, has had its economic foundation stripped away and exported, and its traditional values eroded.  Much of that is a rust belt sort of thing, which is where the epicenter of discontent can be found.  But it spreads out elsewhere in areas of economic distress, including the rural West, where what we're essentially told is that we ought to get computer jobs and become urban cubicle dwellers.  Even our own governments aid in this process by eroding, on occasion, what local business there is.

As massive as the change is here, the post-war change is even more dramatic for Canadians.  Canada was a fundamentally conservative country founded in agriculture with a strong tie to the United Kingdom. Going into World War Two, most of Canada, outside of Quebec, was extremely rural and extremely British.  Quebec was divided, but the bulk of the Francophone population was not only very conservative, but rural and agrarian, the only thing that had kept it from being absorbed into the larger Canadian whole.

War, we've noted here, changes anything, and the Canada that came out of World War Two started to change pretty rapidly.  Not all at once, to be sure.  As late as the late 1950s, people moving to Toronto could expect to be moving to an essentially English city that closed up on Sundays entirely.  

Much of that has now been swept away. Canada is an urban country, like Australia is, with urban values.  The US is actually much more rural, by and large, than Canada, in spite of its much larger population.  But the rural areas do remain, and the strong East/West divide does as well.  What's also occurred, however, is a huge cultural shift in which Canada has become a very liberal country.

Or it makes pretense to being so.

In the homes, out on the farms and ranches, you'll get rumblings of another view.  Many I know, and again I know more in the East than the West, are certainly very "progressive" in outlook.  Nonetheless, I could never get a straight answer from anyone why people were enthralled with Justin Trudeau.  And in individual news I see the photos of people visiting the traditional Canada, including Canadians, not the side streets of the Second City.  

And out in the West, Western Canadians often seem distressed about how a society that isn't and wasn't that much different than the Western US has become so controlled in a fashion.  The comment on the Canadian right to bear arms, which in Canadian law doesn't exist, is telling on that.

A lot of these same factors are playing out in every country in the Western world simultaneously.  This helps explain, I think, a lot of the reaction to masks and the like.  People have actually been upset with the direction of things dating back to the 1980s, or even the 1970s.  They're reacting now. What probably pushed them over the edge, however, happened before COVID 19.

These are dangerous times.  The assumption that democracy is an inevitably victorious force is an assumption, not an historical fact.  History teaches us that when a large minority feels it can get no voice, it puts a country at risk.  In those times, the people who tend to pick up the voice are: 1) demagogues (Huey Long, Donald Trump, 2) Caudillos (Franco, Petain) and would be Caesars (Hitler, Putin).

Of course, in such times others can rise to save the day, and that's more often the case.

It's clear that the United States is a lot more down this disastrous path than Canada is, but the protests show that it isn't the case that everyone in Canada is thrilled with the path its been on since, really, 1945.  The same forces are at work in nearly every Western democracy right now.

The solution?  

That may be for true conservatives to offer.  Finding uncompromised ones who haven't sold out partially to populist and demagogues is pretty tough in the US right now, however.  Canada's politics are different, so perhaps they have a different path forward.

Footnotes

1.  Anyone who is a dual citizen or who has Canadian relatives probably speant some time trying to explain Donald Trump and often being embarrased for the country by having to explain Trump.

At the same time, we also would occasionally get unsolicited emails and comments from Canadian friends who were big Trump fans, but had to keep their opinions more or less silent themselves, which is also embarassing as they would tend to assume that any American they knew probably held the same view.  Indeed, the assumption that everyone you know personally holds the same views you do is probably a default human assumption.

2.  Indeed, the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church's prohibition on clergymen marrying came about in order to prevent the priesthood from becoming an inherited position.  After the seperation of the English Church from the Catholic Church in 1534 this was changed in in the UK and in the UK itself the priesthood did become somewhat of an inherited position.

Subsidiarity Economics. The times more or less locally, Part IV

  

TerraPower, Wyoming Governor and PacifiCorp announce efforts to advance nuclear technology in Wyoming

Natrium™ Reactor Demonstration Project will bring new energy development and jobs to the state

 

CHEYENNE, Wyo. –  TerraPower and PacifiCorp, today announced efforts to advance a Natrium™ reactor demonstration project at a retiring coal plant in Wyoming. The companies are evaluating several potential locations in the state.

“I am thrilled to see Wyoming selected for this demonstration pilot project, as our great state is the perfect place for this type of innovative utility facility and our coal-experienced workforce is looking forward to the jobs this project will provide,” said Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon. “I have always supported an all-of-the-above energy portfolio for our electric utilities. Our state continues to pave the way for the future of energy, and Wyoming should be the place where innovative energy technologies are taken to commercialization."

The development of a nuclear energy facility will bring welcome tax revenue to Wyoming’s state budget, which has seen a significant decline in recent years. This demonstration project creates opportunities for both PacifiCorp and local communities to provide well-paying and long-term jobs for workers in Wyoming communities that have decades of energy expertise.

“This project is an exciting economic opportunity for Wyoming. Siting a Natrium advanced reactor at a retiring Wyoming coal plant could ensure that a formerly productive coal generation site continues to produce reliable power for our customers,” said Gary Hoogeveen, president and CEO of Rocky Mountain Power, a business unit of PacifiCorp. “We are currently conducting joint due diligence to ensure this opportunity is cost-effective for our customers and a great fit for Wyoming and the communities we serve.”

“I commend Rocky Mountain Power for joining with TerraPower in helping Wyoming develop solutions so that our communities remain viable and continue to thrive in a changing economy, while keeping the state at the forefront of energy solutions,” said Wyoming Senate President Dan Dockstader.

“Wyoming has long been a headwaters state for baseload energy. This role is proving to be ever more important. This effort takes partnerships, and we welcome those willing to step up and embrace these opportunities with us,” said Wyoming Speaker of the House Eric Barlow.

The location of the Natrium demonstration plant is expected to be announced by the end of 2021. The demonstration project is intended to validate the design, construction and operational features of the Natrium technology, which is a TerraPower and GE Hitachi technology.

“Together with PacifiCorp, we’re creating the energy grid of the future where advanced nuclear technologies provide good-paying jobs and clean energy for years to come,” said Chris Levesque, president and CEO of TerraPower. “The Natrium technology was designed to solve a challenge utilities face as they work to enhance grid reliability and stability while meeting decarbonization and emissions-reduction goals.”

Wyoming’s Governor Gordon committed in early 2021 to lead the state in becoming carbon net negative while continuing to use fossil fuels through the advancement and utilization of next-generation technologies that can provide baseload power to the grid, including nuclear and carbon capture solutions. Wyoming is the largest net energy exporter in the United States and finding carbon solutions will ensure the state continues to provide energy to consumers across the nation while decreasing CO2 emissions.

In October 2020, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), through its Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (ARDP), awarded TerraPower $80 million in initial funding to demonstrate the Natrium technology. TerraPower signed the cooperative agreement with DOE in May 2021. Next steps include further project evaluation, education and outreach as well as state and federal regulatory approvals, prior to the acquisition of a Natrium facility.

Learn more about this project and the Natrium technology at wyadvancedenergy.com

Allow me to note, you heard it here first.

I've been advocating this for several years.

This is, quite frankly, a major event.  This signals, whether people wish to realize it or not, the state realizing that a new economic era has arrived, and the state needs to plan on that basis.  It also acknowledges the reality that if the US is to have a carbon neutral economy, as it claims, and no matter what you think of that, nuclear is not only part and parcel of that, it's central to it.

June 3, 2021

More on this big (and it is big) story.

The move is in association with Bill Gates' and Warren Buffett's Terra Power and is clearly part of their push for green energy.  It's slated to begin producing electricity in 2028, which is remarkable for a facility whose location has not yet been chosen, although some potential sites, including Glenrock, have been mentioned.

The reactor would be a Natrium small modular reactor, which is much smaller than the large nuclear reactors we're familiar with, such as those depicted above.   These smaller reactors are designed specifically to replace coal-fired plants by using part of an existing coal power plants cooling system.

June 11, 2021

A Federal Court suspended drilling on 630 square miles of Federal lands in Montana and Wyoming for the BLM failing to comply with NEPA in regard to sage chickens when the leases were issued.

Fire season commenced all over the state this past week as temperatures soared into the 90s.

Yellowstone introduced driverless electric shuttles.

June 15, 2021

The price of oil is up over $70.00/bbl, a recent high.

While this is good for Wyoming, there's every sign that the economy is overheating and entering an inflationary stage, in spite of the Biden Administration's early indications that this wouldn't happen.  At the same time, there's an increasing labor shortage caused, in part, by laid off workers refusing to return to their pre COVID jobs.

June 16, 2021

Practically buried in all of the other news and entertainment, the G7 agreed to forego extending loans to coal firepower plant construction.

A Federal Judge declared President Biden's executive order suspension on new oil and gas leases blocked.   While not having read this opinion, as Presidents can classically withdraw Federal lands from entry, I suspect this will ultimately be reversed, but not before numerous additional leases are issued.

June 26, 2021

The new nuclear power plant planned for Wyoming is estimated to create up to 3,000 construction jobs and perhaps up to 400 full time jobs.

June 28, 2021

The Shoshone and Arapaho Tribes have taken over production on their Circle Ridge oilfield directly.  In doing so, they've noted that it is their view that fossil fuels are on the way out.

June 28, 2021, cont.

And. . . 

Supreme Court deals final blow to Wyoming coal port suit

presumably, nobody was surprised.

Headline from the Trib.

At least we weren't, as we were predicting an end unfavorable to the state for, well, forever.

July 9, 2021

Natrona County approved a wind farm to go in north of town.

The event was notable for the opposition it drew which puts a spotlight on how this debate has evolved over time.  Early on, many of those closely associated with the extractive industries, or those who just had a traditional view of energy generation, dismissed wind farms as inefficient and something that would never really get rolling. At the same time, there were those who opposed them based upon their ascetics, or based upon the threat they pose to birds.

Since that time wind turbines have become much more efficient and even though people hate to admit it, they can now compete with coal-fired electrical generation.  This has caused the debate to shift among some people, and it's taken on a political right/left aspect to it in some quarters, much like everything else in the country right now. Just recently, for example, Senatorial candidate Chuck Gray blamed wind turbines for the mid-winter power outages in Texas.

Given this, it isn't too surprising that the proposed wind farm drew some opposition, indeed quite a bit of it.  One Natrona County Commissioner claimed he "despise[d]" renewable energy, even though he felt the application had met the criteria and voted for it.  It's hard to imagine anyone despising renewable energy and I suspect that wasn't really what he meant, but there is a lot of opposition to it.

In contrast, a Converse County Commissioner came to speak in favor of it, noting that recent wind farm construction in his county had been an economic life raft during the recent oilfield slow down.  The airport testified against the wind farm out of safety concerns, but apparently the FAA had found there were none.

Personally, it's hard to see wind turbines as ascetically pleasing, but there are at least two wind farms visible from the city already, which makes the view shed argument somewhat difficult.

July 13, 2021

Plains Tires, a Wyoming tire retail company with stores around the state, has been bought by Les Schwab Tire Centers, a larger company with 500 stores across the west.

Plains Tires was founded in 1941.

July 15, 2021

The state's coal production fell 21% in 2020.

July 20, 2021

Governor Signs Temporary Executive Order to help Alleviate Fuel Shortages

CHEYENNE, Wyo. –  To help prevent potential gasoline, diesel and aviation fuel shortages, Governor Mark Gordon has signed an Executive Order (EO) that puts in place temporary emergency rules for the Wyoming Department of Transportation allowing drivers to make extra fuel deliveries.

The order is effective July 20 through August 20.

Demand for fuel has increased due to post-pandemic travel in the United States, with increases in travel and tourism seen throughout the state. In addition, an early fire season has resulted in increased fire suppression efforts which have also impacted demand for various fuels across the western United States.

“It is critical that we have adequate fuel supplies. This is particularly necessary for air support during this fire season,” Governor Gordon said. “These emergency rules will help increase fuel deliveries without potentially harmful delays.”

The emergency rule suspends regulations on driving hours to allow drivers to meet the increased demand for fuel, but still indicates drivers cannot be on the road when they are fatigued. Fuel delivery companies are specifically asked to take extra precautions to ensure the safety of both the public and company drivers.

This order applies specifically to drivers bringing gasoline, diesel or aviation fuel to Wyoming or doing in-state deliveries. The order also aligns Wyoming with other surrounding states, which have implemented similar executive orders.

For questions pertaining to enforcement, contact Wyoming Highway Patrol Lt. Dustin Ragon at 777-4872.

A copy of the Executive Order is attached and may be found on the Governor’s website. 

July 24, 2021

I'm constantly hearing around here that electric vehicles will never really come to Wyoming as their just not suited for the state. 

Never mind that nobody on the plant really makes vehicles for Wyoming.  Indeed, if that were the case we'd all be driving the Toyota Hilux as it's about the last pickup made on Earth that's really rugged in the old-fashioned Dodge Power Wagon sense. But even the "no electric truck" argument just doesn't hold water.

Ford here make a pitch that the day of the electric pickup has arrived, starting off with a cowboy in their advertisement.

There’s a New Revolution Starting

I know that this isn't a popular view around here.  The state just completed an always doomed effort to force Pacific coast states to have a coal port against their will.  A political ad that's now running claims one politician "saved our coal jobs".

Well, things are definitely changing and we need to prepare for it.

July 30, 2021

Two large Wyoming coal producers have asked for royalty reductions.

August 3, 2021

The University of Wyoming is seeking to use American Recovery Plan Act funds to fund its restructing.

August 20, 2021

Gillette Community College will become its own district, with large scale support of area voters in a special election.

August 28, 2021

PacificCorp announced plans to retire all of its coal-fired power plants by 2040, with the majority retired by 2030.

September 1, 2021

The moratorium on Federal oil and gas leases will end in December.

September 2, 2021

County health is predicting a rise in labor shortages locally due to an increase of school related COVID 19 cases, as parents return home to take care of sick children.

September 11, 2021

Harvard University announced that it will not invest in fossil fuels and will wind down its existing legacy investments.

As an isolated matter, this probably doesn't matter much, but it recalls similar acts concerning investment in South Africa which did contribute to the end of the apartheid era.  If this becomes a larger movement, it could become significant.

September 15, 2021

Taking a page out of Wyoming's "sue 'em" book, Vermont has sued four oil companies, alleging that they have misled the public on global warming.

There's no reason to believe that Vermont was inspired by Wyoming's recent coal port lawsuits, but the danger of such actions is made apparent by this.  The doors of the courts, of course, are open to all.

September 20, 2021

The Bureau of Land Management is moving its  headquarters back to Washington D.C.

September 21, 2021

Bridger coal is closing it's underground mine in Wyoming. This will result in the loss of about 100 jobs.

October 6, 2021

The International Council on Mining and Metals, a mining organization, has committed to zero green house gas emissions by 2050.

Delta receives a subsidty to continue serving the Natrona County International Airport

October, 6 cont:

Updates for October, 2021

 

October 6, 2021.  Governor Gordon visits US/Mexico border.

October 7, 2021

As a followup to the above, although not exactly on topic, the Governors involved in the border meeting issued the following plan regarding the border crisis:

JOINT POLICY FRAMEWORK ON THE BORDER CRISIS 10 Policies to Protect America, Restore Security, and End the Crisis

1. Continue Title 42 public health restrictions: The Biden Administration should continue to invoke Title 42 to refuse entry to individuals coming into the country due to the COVID-19 public health risk, which was initially issued by the previous administration. Title 42 currently expels approximately 44% of apprehensions. In July, more than 18% of migrant families and 20% of unaccompanied minors tested positive for COVID-19 upon being released from Border Patrol custody. Reports estimate that the Biden Administration has placed approximately 40,000 COVID-19 positive migrants into American cities.

2. Fully reinstate the Migrant Protection Protocols: The Biden Administration should comply with recent federal court rulings and fully reinstate the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) established by the prior administration, which require asylum seekers to return to Mexico to await their court hearing outside of the United States, serving as a deterrent to cross. Upon taking office, President Biden issued a directive to terminate the MPP, and although litigation may continue, the Biden Administration should halt any attempts to appeal and fully reinstate the policy.

3. Finish securing the border: The Biden Administration should reopen construction contracts to continue building the border wall and invest in infrastructure and technology, such as lights, sensors, or access roads, to complete the border security system. Upon taking office, President Biden terminated the national emergency at the border, stopped all border construction, and redirected funds to build the wall.

4. End catch and release: The Biden Administration should end the Obama-era policy of catching and releasing apprehended migrants into U.S. cities along the South Texas border, leaving illegal immigrants paroled and able to travel anywhere in the country. Upon taking office, President Biden issued an Executive Order reinstating catch and release policies that incentivize illegal immigration and make deportation laws difficult to enforce.

5. Clear the judicial backlog: The Biden Administration should dedicate additional judges and resources to our U.S. immigration courts to end the growing backlog and expedite court appearances for illegal migrants. Reports indicate backlogged cases total more than 1 million, the most ever.

6. Resume the deportation of all criminals: The Biden Administration should enforce all deportation laws of criminally convicted illegal aliens. Upon taking office, President Biden issued an Executive Order ordering the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to prioritize only the deportation of aggravated felons, gang members, or terrorists, leaving other criminals to remain in the United States.

7. Dedicate federal resources to eradicate human trafficking and drug trafficking: Due to the rapid increase of cartel activity, the Biden Administration should dedicate additional resources to eradicate the surge in human trafficking and drug trafficking, arrest offenders, support victims, and get dangerous drugs—like fentanyl and methamphetamine—off our streets.

8. Re-enter all agreements with our Northern Triangle partners and Mexico: President Biden should re-enter the prior administration’s agreement with the Northern Triangle countries (El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras) and Mexico. The countries agreed to enforce their respective borders, fix their asylum systems, and receive migrants seeking asylum before they journey north to the United States. Upon taking office, President Biden issued an Executive Order terminating the agreements.

9. Send a clear message to potential migrants: President Biden, Vice President Harris, and Biden Administration officials at every level should state clearly and unequivocally that our country’s borders are not open and that migrants seeking economic opportunity should not attempt to abuse or misuse the asylum process. Prior to and after taking office, President Biden blatantly encouraged illegal immigrants to come to the United States.

10. Deploy more federal law enforcement officers: Due to overwhelming needs at the border, the Biden Administration should deploy more and provide greater resources to U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. Due to a lack of federal resources, Arizona and Texas have had to initiate an Emergency Management Assistance Compact to request law enforcement resources directly from states, receiving offers from eight states, to arrest and detain illegal trespassers.

October 9, 2021

A global agreement has been reached on an international corporate minimum tax of 15%.  The agreement will have to pass Congress before it becomes law in the United States, something which the nearly evenly divided Senate will make difficult.

October 10, 2021

The budget reconciliation bill before Congress contains a provision for an 8% royalty on minerals extracted from Federal lands under the Mining Law of 1872 and related provisions.  Right now, such extraction is Federal royalty free and always has been.

October 12, 2021

Oil is up over $80.00 a barrel

Prior threads:

Subsidiarity Economics. The times more or less locally, Part III

Eating the Seed Corn

Subsidiarity Economics. The times more or less locally, Part II

The 2021 Wyoming Legislature, Part I

Cliffnotes of the Zeitgist Part 14. The Industrial Revolution and Child Care and other musings.

Children and Forced Industrialization

You've seen them here before, and yes, here they are again.  Migrant farm couples, 1938.

I've come to be simply amazed by the degree to which Americans are now acclimated to the concept that the government ought to pay for things, well, related to sex in some way or another.

Joe Biden's economic "relief" bill, which really addresses a topic that no longer really needs addressing, includes a big boost for pre K childcare.

Why?

To make my surprise, if that's what it is, more plain, what that means is that money will come from taxes (and loans) to help pay for the childcare of people so that they don't have to pay for it, directly, themselves.  

More bluntly, this will make it easier, which is part of what is being boosted as a reason to do it, for those with low incomes to have two working parents, as the thesis is that otherwise they'll have to make economic choices that will be difficult.

First of all, while it makes me sound like a Marxist saying it, isn't it clear that what this amounts to is the forced industrial employment of women?  What hte goal really is, is to make it easier for working mothers to work, which rapidly equates into forcing them to work, which is essentially what our economy had done over the past 70 years.  That is, we've converted from the early industrial revolution economy of forcing men out of their homes to work from eight to twelve hours per day to one t hat now requires women to do the same.  In order to do that we've subsidized all sorts of things to the benefit, essentially, of industry, and now we propose to go one step further.

Indeed, the irony of this is that this is where Marxist and Capitalist come back around and meet.  Early Marxists sought the dissolution of marriage and the collectivization of child care.  That has been regarded s horrific, but that's exactly what industrial economies have done over the past seventy years and the Biden Administration proposes to knock it up a notch.

This isn't just.

It isn't just to force women to leave their children in order to work.  It likewise wasn't just to do that in the case of men, but the level of subsidization evolved into force was lower in that case, although still very real.

It also isn't just to tax people in order to pay for the children of others, except in dire emergency.  People like me who have paid for and raised our own children are now being asked to pay for the care of children we don't remotely know, including children who are raised in circumstances which we wouldn't approve of.  If, for example, we can be taxed to pay for childcare for these children, can we also justly require that they be raised with basic sets fo values, including the value of a two parent home, which quite a few won't have?  No, certainly not, we won't be allowed to suggest that.

I feel this way, I'd note, on a lot of programs in this area, the long lasting ones which provide examples of why going down this path is a bad idea.  I've mentioned the "free and reduced" lunch and breakfast programs before, which directly transfers the duty of feeding children from parent to government.  I know that it had good intentions, all of these things have unthinking good intentions.  The proposals to wipe out student debt or provide free college education also have good intentions, and also are all massively subject to the law of unintended consequences.  What they also are, without it really being thought out, are subsidies for industry in varying degrees.

I know that the ship has sailed on many of these things, the strong evidence against doing them notwithstanding.  It's almost impossible to go back, once these steps are taken.  Americans may imagine themselves in some quarters as being rugged individualist, but even people who imagine themselves to be real libertarians acclimate themselves to such things pretty quickly.  But it is interesting to wonder what would happen if things went the other way.  I.e., if, save for K through 12 education itself, the government simply got out of this area entirely.  Feed your own children, provide for you own children, no subsidies for childcare of any kind, and not even any governmental bodies that seek to enforce child support orders.  Leave it up to the individual.

It'd be really rough for some at first, but I suspect pretty quickly a lot of the old rules would rebound once the burdens returned to the individual.  It might even do more economically than proposals to raise minimum wages would, as lots of families would be back to one breadwinner.

But no, we're just going to keep in marrying the government and making it the big parent.

I should note that probably right away, if anyone reads this, there will be a claim that this is radically traditionalist or something, or maybe anti feminist.  Feminism, I'd note, is a term that's now so broad to pracitically not have a meanning without further refining, but in any event, none of that is intended.

Indeed, I'd note that its already the case that the public sector has, in some instances, taken care of this much the same way that it took care of health insurance during the 1940s.  It's a recruiting incentive.  Some big firms of various kinds have in house daycares so their female employees don't have to worry about finding one and still being able to get to work.

In addition to that, at least by my observation, it's also the case that workplaces have becoming much more child friendly over the years, particularly in recent years.  I never observed children in working spaces when I was  younger.  Never.  Only farms and ranches were the exception.  Now I see them all the time.  Its not unusual at all for female employees to bring children into the office for one reason or another, often for long hours, and for that to result in very little notice.   Therefore, I really don't think that the claim "women will have to choose to go childless" is true, although that no doubt has an economic aspect to it. The poorer you are, the fewer the options.  It's one thing to bring your child into a business office. It's quite another to your job at the bar or restaurant.

I also don't think that this would ipso facto mean an increase in abortions.  Indeed, the current legal trends are towards increasing restrictions in this area as both men and women support increasing restrictions.  And social trends seem to suggest that younger people are less interested in acting like their grandparents who came of age in the 60s and 70s in this area in general.

What I do think, however, is that it forces choices up front and therefore vest "moral hazard" where it ought to be vested, at the individual level.  That probably reemphasizes some old values while combing them with the new economy, which should be done.

It probably won't be, however.

QAnon, Russia and China.

A new report conforms that Russia and China have had a significant role in QAnon's conspiracy theories.

D'oh!

Yup:

A Conspiracy Thesis about Conspiracy Theorist. Qanon is the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service.

Sending Signals

Yes, you've seen this young lady here before as well.

The Natrona County Commission signaled its support by making the county a "Second Amendment Sanctuary County", which actually doesn't do that, and which actually wouldn't mean anything if they did.  

The actual resolution simply states they support the Second Amendment, which we already knew.

There are a lot of such bills circulating nationwide.  None of them have been tested yet, but as the U.S. Supreme Court has taken up a case involving New York's restrictions on carrying outside the home, they effectively will be soon, which may be in the category of people needing to be careful what they wish for.

It should be obvious, fwiw, that local governments opting out of Federal laws, whether they be on firearms or immigration or whatever, can't really be done. The NatCo one doesn't attempt to do that, however.  It's more in the nature of a resolution.

Chow

1918 Trailmobile field kitchen.

I'd really like to try this:

Bear Bomb Burrito.

And this:

Chorizo Burger

And this:

Chili No Beans

Automated shuttle busses in Yellowstone

Electric shuttles are coming to Yellowstone.

Electric transportation is going to be everywhere really soon. This is obvious, even though skeptics still assert it can't happen quickly and that it won't be soon.  It's hear now.

Indeed, this has reached the peculiar point at which skeptics have gone from "won't happen" to "wont' happen soon", which is always the shark jumping moment in a debate.  Now, basically, the skeptics have agreed it will in fact happen, but not soon.

The most recent "not soon" argument comes about in the form of asserting that there are so many petroleum fueled vehicles on the road they can't be replaced soon.  And there's something to that.  Cars last a lot longer than they used to, but people still buy new ones.  Indeed, I'm about the only person I know who doesn't buy new ones.  The electric ones are going to come on quickly, quicker than skeptics would allow, and that process will accelerate as it comes on.

Put another way, lots of people today who have no plans to get an electric vehicle, and maybe even hold the opposite as their view, will begin to change their minds once a one shows up on a neighbor's driveway.  Once two electric vehicles show up, it really begins to change quickly.

Good and bad news from the census

People, and the press, get so used to viewing something one way that to do so in any other fashion is almost impossible, a fact amplified by the reality that the press rarely has a very good grasp on anything as reporters are generalists, not specialists.

The recent census reports that the US population grew at the lowest rate since the Great Depression.  That's really good news, even though the press seems to think it's bad news.

The country is at a point where its current population is probably higher than it ought to be for a host of economic and environmental reasons, but that would require accepting that adding population is bad for the environment, which it is, and that adding population tends to be bad for workers in an advanced economy.  In neither instance are too many willing ot admit that, even though it is true.

Indeed, the population of the US would now be probably declining, like that of much of Western Europe's is, but for our insanely high rate of immigration.  People don't like to admit that either.

As evidence of some of this the local entities that lament a lack of population growth are lamenting it.  Locals from here, however, with more of a grasp on things, are glad of it.

But not for the region. Colorado and Utah are both continuing to see insanely high growth which will convert them, over time, to Ohio. That's not really good.

"The Ethnic Parish"

The hard to photograph St. Joseph's Polish Catholic Church in Denver.

Last weekend, with both of us now fully vaccinated here, and all the kids vaccinated, even though they aren't living here but in the University Town, I went back to Mass and was glad to do so.

A speaker was there, which puts me in the odd situation of hearing a speaker on my first time back for awhile, due to the COVID dispensation.  He spoke on the annual Bishop's appeal.

Later that week I saw a Catholic Twitter feed in which the writer was celebrating the end of the "Ethnic Parish".

Which caused me to recall the Bishop's Appeal.

For modern Catholics in many areas who have never been to an "Ethnic Parish", which would include me to some degree, some explanation may be needed. What is meant by that is the situation which once was very common in which a parish was "Polish", or "Irish", or "German".  That is, most of the people there were from ethnic communities and their faith was part of their overall culture, supposedly.

I'm frankly, I'd note, slightly skeptical on that to a degree, or rather skeptical on the way that is so often presented.  These parishes were never as uniform as may be imagined, although there's certainly something to it.  Indeed, in various places, to include Wyoming, parishes were set up very near existing ones in order to accommodate the ethnic backgrounds of the parishioners.

In spite of what angry Rad Trads may imagine, there was never an intent, as far as I can tell, to wipe out the ethnic parish.  Parishes simply evolved.  And indeed the ethnic parish deep inside a happy Catholic Ghetto that Rad Trads imagine and want to go back to is often still there, it's just moved on ethnically.  Irish neighborhoods became Puerto Rican ones, and so on.  And that process continues on.  If you've been to a Byzantine Catholic church for example you'll find that they're now multiethnic.  Indeed, if you want a real effort to de-ethnicize parishes, the Eastern Orthodox provide a better example as in many places, both following fleeing parishioners from "main line" protestant churches, as well as in accommodating them, and also in simply recognizing they need to be less ethnic as "X-Americans" become "Americans with X heritage", they're making an intentional effort to remain Orthodox while not being tied to an ethnicity.

Still, like most myths, there's an inkling of truth here to a very slight degree, and what that is, is that over the past thirty years or so some have somewhat rejoiced in the decline in what they thought were ethnic parishes, which was also accompanied by the "we're all one family" type of atmosphere.  

Indeed, "Catholic" means "universal", and therefore we are all one family.  The Catholic Church may have had ethnic parishes, but overall, its the most diverse organization on earth by some huge measure.  So, for the historically minded, the recent push here to essentially create an ethnic parish is a bit surprising.  Effectively, its the recreation of ethnic parishes.

This has been going on for some time, in all fairness.  It just hasn't happened here for a really long time.  I frankly don't knw the last time it occurred, and in thinking about it the only really ethnic parishes I can think of are those in Rock Springs and Cheyenne.  A book published about the earliest parish here would have you believe that it was 100% Irish when it was founded, but that's simply incorrect.

Its that which drew my attention, really, to this matter.  It's pretty clear that the Bishop has decided that my old parish will be a Hispanic one.  I get what he's attempting to do and I'm not opposing it, but it does leave those of us who have deep roots there sort of homeless, although I probably only think that now as I've gotten sort of oddly sentimental as I've aged. Truth be known, while I was baptized in that parish, and both my parents had their funerals there, and our wedding was there, our second kid was baptized at the across town parish and when our kids were young, we went there as it was more convenient.  Even when I was growing up we often went to the nearby neighborhood parish due to its Mass times.

Indeed, as a kid our house was closer to that parish than the downtown parish, although vehicle wise it was more of a chore to get to.  They were effectively equidistant.  Where I live now they all are equidistant.  Anyhow, I find myself in the position of being hypocritical in commenting here, and both understanding and lamenting the change.  Having said that, I've already gone over to the across town parish as it has the earliest Mass and because I don't speak Spanish, which is increasingly becoming the utilized language downtown.

Artist Evolution and Blond Bombshells

Marylyn Monroe, who never went out of style, fairly obviously.

One of  the really interesting things about things about youthful musical acts, particularly female ones, is that, at some point, they must reinvent themselves or they cease to be.  "Madonna" can't be a nearly nude pop tart flirting with the profane forever.  Miley Cyrus has to evolve away from being "Hanna Montana".  Katie Perry couldn't apparently be a limited venue Christian singer.  Taylor Swift can't be a cute childish country star her entire career.  You get the picture.

Sometimes, I'm pretty convinced, a careful handler manages the evolution. Sometimes the artists do it on their own.  It's hard to know whether there's a Col. Tom Parker in the background all the time or not.

Billie Eilish is very clearly undergoing this.

I don't like her music at all, so I don't follow her much, but her visage is on my Twitter feed today and the pattern is now clear.

Eilish got started as a pouty seemingly semi distressed teenager who wore way too much clothing.  About a year ago, she started stripping herself of her clothing, and now she's let her hair go blond, if it is blond, or dyed it blond if not.  Anyhow, she's good looking in the 1950s Marilyn Monroe sort of way, which is to say full figured and good looking.  Her music not be changing, but she's plastered on the cover, apparently of the British edition of Vogue pretty much falling out.

I'm frankly of the view that her original persona was irritating.  I don't know what to think of this, however.  It'd be nice to think that a female pop artist could be out there without being, no matter what her songs may represent, sex.  That day, however, doesn't seem to have arrived.  At least she's clothed, however, and moving towards a highly glamourous persona.  Chances are some handler is purposely recalling Monroe, Loren and the early Cardinale in order to try to send the message that she's an adult.

One message she is sending is that there's a lot of "sexual misconduct" in the entertainment industry. This isn't news, but at least she's saying something.  Her comment to British Vogue basically read as an entitlement of sexual immorality, which would actually be a species of real progress coming from that quarter.  Perhaps its not entirely surprising, however, given that her generation has pretty much had it with things Boomer, of which the Sexual Revolution is part.

It's also interesting to see how the more classic concept of the female form has seemingly returned. Eilish isn't thin  and isn't fat, and is just nice looking.  If she can pull off not sounding and appearing like a Woke Siren, maybe that will be progress.  If so, she'll join some other recent female media figures who are making some shift uncomfortably in their seats, such as Keira Knightly.