African Levels of Corruption

Many years ago, maybe 25 or so, I read an article in "The Economist" newspaper about public corruption in Africa.  "The Economist" tried to convey the staggering level of corruption with a joke.  I have not been able to find this joke anywhere on the internet, so I write it down here, from memory.

First, you have to know that the London School of Economics is an astonishingly influential institution.  Many young people, who go on to positions of power and influence in their home countries, are educated at the LSE and develop personal friendships there with young people from other countries.  Indeed, the LSE has educated more than a few prime ministers and dictators.  The story:

Two young students at the LSE, an African and an Asian, became fast friends and stayed in touch after they returned to their home countries.  Both developed influential careers in the service of their respective governments.

It came to pass, after some years, that the African had an opportunity to travel to East Asia.  His Asian friend from the LSE was delighted to receive him into is large and beautiful home, where they ate an elegant dinner.

Enjoying their after-dinner cigars and cocktails, on the balcony with a lovely view, the African could not help asking, "I am delighted at your success, but how can you afford all this on a government salary?"

The Asian pointed out into the distance and asked, "Do you see all that development?"  The African looked out and saw earth moving equipment, construction cranes, and all the obvious signs of a great deal of work happening.  He nodded.  The Asian then proudly tapped himself on the chest and explained, "10%".  Meaning, of course, that in bribes and kick-backs, he had skimmed into his own pocket 10% of the expenditures on the development.

The African nodded in understanding.

A couple of years later, the Asian had the opportunity to travel in Africa.  His African friend from the LSE was delighted to receive him.  Upon arriving, the Asian drove up to a palatial estate where he was received by liveried servants and they enjoyed a sumptious meal.

Enjoying their after-dinner cigars and cocktails, on a balcoy with a spectacular view, the Asian could not help asking, "I am delighted at your success, but how can you possibly afford all this on a government salary?"

The African pointed out into the distance and asked, "Do you see all that development?"  The Asian looked and looked and could see nothing but virgin wilderness.  He turned to his friend with a curious look on his face.  The African then proudly tapped himself on the chest and explained, "100%".

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is African levels of corruption.

Political Anaphylaxis

Is it worth saying that Trump and Clinton are not, themselves, the problem?  They are mere symptoms of the problem.  It's not as if everything has been peachy all along with American politics and then, all of a sudden, two monsters appear out of nowhere.  Rather, American politics have been corrupt, and getting more corrupt, certainly since the first Clinton administration, if not before.  I would say the rot started in 1942 (under a Democratic administration, unsurprisingly) with the Wickard v Filburn decision of the SCOTUS.

Roscoe Filburn, an Ohio farmer, grew wheat entirely for his own use, to feed his animals, selling none of it on the open market.  And yet, the SCOTUS decided that Filburn, by minding his own business on his own property, was violating the **Interstate** Commerce Clause.  So, the federal government wanted to regulate the actions of a private citizen on his own property, and the Supreme Court agreed, using a legal argument indistinguishable from Jabberwocky.

With the Wickard decision in mind, how can you be surprised with the 2005 SCOTUS decision, Kelo v City of New London?  In that decision, the state expropriated one private citizen's private property to give it to another private citizen.  From Wickard to Kelo, the Constitution had come to mean nothing.  So, in 2010 when then Speaker of The House, Nancy Pelosi was asked by what Constitutional authority did Congress enact the Affordable Care Act, she responded, "Are you serious?"  It was perfectly clear that Pelosi could not give an answer because she did not care about the question.  The Constitution had become irrelevant to the the most powerful member of the People's House, the person third in line to the presidency of the U.S.

As Angelo Codevilla has observed, as Mark Levin has observed, as has been observed by more than a few people who pay the least attention, we have been living in a lawless society for more than a while, already.  No wonder Hillary Clinton feels she can do whatever she likes.  If the Constitution does not mean what it says it means then, in the notorious words of Al Gore (March, 1997), "There is no controlling legal authority."

How has it come to this?  How do we get two of the most despised people in the country contending for the presidency?  I think the answer is self-evident.  As our politics have become more and more corrupt, good people have declined to dive into the political cesspool.  Criminals and weirdos are all we have left.  Or, as Edmund Burke would have it, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”

I can say only this in defense of the repugnant Donald Trump (I have thought him repugnant long before he entered politics).  A vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote for the status quo, for continuing and worsening public corruption.  Donald Trump, however distasteful, however inadequate, is a reaction to the corruption.  Donald Trump is the incarnation of "Throw the bums out."  He is the anaphylactic shock in the body politic. And that, friends, is as good a reason as any to reject Hillary Clinton and vote for Donald Trump.

Oh, do *I* sound like a crackpot?  Then let me remind you that come Jan 20, 2017 one of Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump will be our next president.  And if you have not yet absorbed that kick in the nuts, then you are the crackpot.