Today In History

Today’s newsletter is about history and the future. I didn’t have room for this digression but it sent me down a Wikipedia rabbit-hole anyway:

On May 9, 1726, several men were hanged at Tyburn following their arrest during a raid on Mother Clap's Molly House

The term “molly house” referred to a gathering place for gay men, usually a tavern, coffee shop, and/or brothel. Sodomy had been punishable by death since the Buggery Act of 1533 (when it first came under civil, rather than ecclesiastical, law) and remained a crime until 1967. Documents surrounding trials for these offenses would later become key objects of historical study. Gay men were more likely than lesbians to be prosecuted, and their history is therefore better documented.

National Review Declares Intellectual Bankruptcy

I suppose I should reiterate that I speak here for myself, and not for my employer, because I’m about to have some opinions.

Leading purveyor of respectable racism The National Review has a modest proposal for education policy. Well, actually, they have an editorial endorsing a study (by the same author as the editorial!) from a think tank funded by Arthur Pope, a.k.a. North Carolina’s homegrown Koch imitation.)

Obviously, the editorial and the “independent” “nonprofit” “public-service” think-tank say, nothing LBJ ever did was good. All those civil rights things. All those pencil-necks thinking they know about chemicals because they have degrees in chemistry and are telling you that shit is poisonous. Gross.

Anyway, with their “standing athwart history and yelling ‘state’s rights'” bona fides out of the way, they seem to think that if we’re going to be stuck having education foisted upon us, we should at least make it as terrible as possible. Force disclosure of speaker fees so that we can check whether the Comparative Literature department hosts too many left-wing scholars. Strike most of Title IX, and definitely stop having schools do anything about sexual assault. Yep, worry MORE about the political leanings of guest speakers, and LESS about rapists.

It wouldn’t be Real Conservative without a nod to the free market, by which I mean fly-by-night diploma mills. Accreditation, they say, should focus only on the financial stability of a school. If it’s profitable, it’s fine! Accreditation for quality is apparently optional. As long as suckers are willing to pay for it with federal loans, who cares if it’s any good?

This, somehow, is what passes for higher ed policy on the right: Art Pope funds some shit-shovelers, they shovel the shit right into the National Review, and the National Review then makes it respectable and somehow we’re supposed to pretend that this recycled shit isn’t shit?

Shit.

Pump the gas, Morty, we gotta get into the next news cycle

It takes more than just a cute cat to rise above the noise. You have to be a cute cat ringing a bell to get food and create an adorable commentary on wage slavery.

You can’t just have an advice board for home repair, not when creepy-tales board /r/nosleep can leak into /r/homeowners and create discussions about what to do when your house is bleeding for maximum upvotes.

You can’t just post a sad bird, you have to be a minor celebrity MMA fighter releasing an injured bird with disastrous consequences.

And you can’t just be surprised by people getting dressed up in fuzzy outfits and holding enormous conventions. Shit, from Leda and the Swan on up, generation upon generation has focused its formative pants-feelings on foxy anthropomorphized foxes.

To make the news with furries, you have to be an unsuspecting charity volunteer who brings a therapy dog to play with people dressed up as dogs.

Ideally, though, you’ll get something that pumps the gas a little more than that. If you wanna move units, whether it’s cereal or politics on TV or just the latest meme, you need more than one angle.

Ideally you get a remix of as many kinds of suck as possible, like this month’s neo-nazi alt-right furry convention disaster. Let’s count them:

  1. Furries.
  2. Some of them are Nazis.
  3. Someone makes a joke about the now-iconic alt-right getting punched to music.
  4. Twitter anger escalates to threats of gun violence.
  5. Ballooning security costs threaten the entire convention
  6. Convention management, led by a sovereign citizen who believes he’s immune to most laws due to special language and red ink, blames the victims.
    • (Aside: The Sovereign Citizen in charge at least partly because a prior convention organizer was revealed to be a sex offender. There’s an alarming amount of overlap between Sovereign Citizens and pedos, because of course there is.)
  7. And then shady accounting and attention bring the entire thing to a screaming halt and everyone points and laughs, starting with furry-community messageboards and moving on out to national news.

Pump the gas, Morty. We gotta get to at least ten different flavors of suck to make it into the next news cycle.

On Negotiation and Influence

I took a class through work yesterday on how to influence people without having formal authority. It’s not just a workplace skill, though, and when we broke up into groups to discuss one specific scenario, the group I was in wound up working not on “How do we allocate resources to competing software development projects?” but “How do three brothers help their mom move to a new apartment?”

My co-worker, the middle brother, didn’t just need to find an apartment and schedule a move. Mom and all three brothers had to agree on the details about size, price, location, and schedule.

Our conclusion during the fifteen minute training exercise was that it would be critical to finesse the older brother. He’s contrary and doesn’t like taking suggestions or orders from the younger brothers, so the middle brother would have to meet with him separately and make sure he felt that he was really a major part of the decision-making process.

That wasn’t the only problem. The thing was, nobody in the conversation was truly working in good faith. Mom says she’s fine with whatever, she’s ready to move to a smaller apartment, and any of the three or four neighborhoods they’ve been considering would be fine. But the youngest brother is always breaking up with girlfriends and asking to move back home, so she wants a second bedroom just in case. She can’t say that because it seems unfair to the other boys, who are helping her pay for this apartment, and also implies a lack of faith in the success of her baby boy’s life choices.

Similar subtexts and unstated preferences apply to neighborhoods: Mom’s in charge of picking the location, since it’s her house. All the brothers want her to move to the neighborhood which will make visiting her most convenient for them. They won’t say that because, you know, it’s mom’s house.

The relevant analogy for national politics kind of writes itself.

Panic! at the Department of Education

Several times in the past couple of days people have asked me to explain an alarming New York Times article titled Student Loan Forgiveness Program Approval Letters May Be Invalid, Education Dept. Says.

This is not an official statement on behalf of my employer, but I can personally offer some reassurance that it’s not as horrible as it sounds.

The headline is of course very, very upsetting to a lot of people who have been counting on loan forgiveness for their public service. Needlessly so, in my opinion.

The issue, like everything else about our student loan system, is a result of the complex interplay between tax law, the Constitution, personal finance, lobbying by banking interests, and decades of amendments to the Higher Education Act of 1965. There’s a reason it’s easy to get confused about this: It’s stupidly complicated.

Public Service Loan Forgiveness is generally based on whether your employer is an eligible nonprofit. So, whether you’re an accountant or janitor or social worker or doctor, the first question for every applicant is “do you work for a qualifying employer?”

Eligible employers include all 501(c)(3) nonprofits, even church-affiliated groups. Also all government (city, state, federal), police, military, public safety, etc. Those are very clear.

Clearly ineligible are anyone working for for-profits, plus clergy, union organizers and partisan political groups. That is, social workers for Catholic Charities are in, but not priests. (I told you the Constitution came into it: subsidizing clergy would become an Establishment clause issue).

There is, however, one area of ambiguity: There are other kinds of nonprofit organizations than 501(c)(3). They’re helpfully labeled 501(c) 4, 5, and 6. That’s unions, professional associations, and so on. For example, the NFL, until about 2 years ago, filed as a 501(c)(6) nonprofit.

Certain non-501(c)(3) nonprofits ARE eligible for PSLF, but ONLY if they (or possibly just those employees) perform certain kinds of services. The question here is that a handful of people applied based on their work for the American Bar Association. They say they were providing eligible services.

Now we come to another complication: the Department of Education doesn’t administer this program themselves, because in America we believe that government can’t do anything right, so it should pay other people to screw things up.

In this case, FedLoan Servicing approved the application on behalf of the Department of Education. Then the Department of Education came back and overruled them.

This became a whole Big Thing because the Department of Education just pissed off a bunch of well-connected lawyers. So, they’re going to get sued and the suit is going to get news coverage.

So, if you think you’re qualified for Public Service Loan Forgiveness, and you’re worried about it, don’t. You’re probably fine.