Wearing surgical mask for SARS CoV-2 / COVID 19; Ignorance, Stupidity and Effective Protection

The wise man without knowledge admits his ignorance and seeks to learn, the ignoramus admits to no ignorance and insists on correcting those with knowledge.

Never in my life have I experienced a greater display of measurable differences between wise persons and ignoramuses than the opportunities for such demonstrations provided by the SARS CoV-2 virus / COVID-19 ailment panic. The erudite person can now judge the book by its cover because the synopsis of the content is displayed on the cover.

In this instance it is literally displayed on the face. By the time you complete reading this you will be endowed with the knowledge that will allow you to look in the mirror and judge whether you see the image of an intellectual or an ignoramus.

Since early March of this year I have mocked, ridiculed and otherwise degraded the peons who frame themselves as more enlightened, more socially responsible, and better protected from the transmission of the SARS CoV-2 virus because they wear surgical type masks.

I do this because of the knowledge I possess based upon a course of lifelong study across numerous domains. Additionally, I have instituted 20 year boycotts of businesses who insult intelligent customers by requiring them to wear surgical masks under the guise that it is to prevent the spread of the SARS CoV-2 virus. Boycotts of 15 years are in effect for businesses located within a jurisdiction in which ignoramus politicians imposed a surgical type mask requirement on customers.

I am now severing relationships with people who abide by, endorse or willfully choose to display their stupidity by wearing a surgical mask under the guise of preventing the spread of the SARS CoV-2 virus. Although likely that many simply wear masks in an effort to satisfy a social expectation that they are “doing their part” what they are doing is being fake and perpetuating stupidity.

Intelligence is contagious. Although highly heritable overall there are some metrics of intelligence which are environmentally impacted during adulthood. This is why neurologists recommend that adults maintain cognitive and logical challenges to their brain throughout their lifespan. These challenges can be promoted or inhibited by the company you keep. Hence I try to be around people more intelligent than me or at least those seeking to be so.

So how do I KNOW that these people are ignoramuses and stupid for wearing surgical masks under these conditions for their stated or implicit purposes? It’s knowledge and experience.

Think back to when people didn’t wear surgical masks in public places and in gatherings of people. Quite simply, think of when surgeons and those involved in surgical procedures wore surgical masks. Hence the name - Duh! Now try to recall the times that you were able to see, with your unaided eye, sprays or splatters being emitted from either yours or another person’s body through laceration, sneezing, coughing or spitting.

From those experiences filter out what didn’t occur in line at the bank, while sitting in a theater or the other venues where people are recently seen wearing surgical type masks. What remains? Is it that time in the grocery store when one customer was beating another over the head with a hammer and blood was being splattered about?

I have airborne contaminant experiences that likely surpasses the common individual. I used to do body work on cars using Bondo or other chemicals to make repairs and then sanding with up to 1200 grit paper before spraying on a coat of paint. I had N95 Filtering Facepiece Respirators (FFRs) and even Tyvek body suits with hoods and respirator hoses that attach to a mechanical air filtering system. I also have an NBC [Nuclear, Biological, Chemical] suit that would be suitable for me to wear when handling Anthrax or other biological pathogens. I have worn specific protective gear when cleaning up a former Meth house or removing asbestos. Finally, as I am a biological organism, I have naturally made the study of human biology including the microbiome a lifelong activity.

There is something I knew about the SARS CoV-2 virus and the surgical or N95 type masks that led me to ridicule people for wearing them. To determine the efficacy of forms of respiratory protective gear is to first see if they pass the smoke test. That will help establish a particle resistance baseline.

If you are considering wearing a mask for protection against transmission of the SARS CoV-2 virus you should first test your knowledge about the properties of what you are trying to filter. First test your knowledge of the size of the SARS CoV-2 virus? What is it? Then move on to the size of a typical smoke particle? What is that? Finally, determine which is larger?

I already knew the answer to that final question long ago but I researched the answers to the other questions so I could give you the warrants for my fore drawn conclusion.

So here is the relevant information. The SARS-CoV-2 virion is approximately 50–200 nanometres in diameter. A typical wood smoke particle is about 400 to 700 nanometers in diameter. Thus, the SARS CoV-2 virus is much smaller than a smoke particle.

If you want to determine whether a particle can pass through a selected protective membrane then use a larger detectable particle as a test measure. You should now be thinking that where there is smoke there may be a SARS CoV-2 virion. Now you know the basis for the smoke test and you may conduct one yourself.

To do so place the selected mask on yourself as you normally do or anticipate how you would normally wear it, set a piece of paper on fire to create smoke and then see if you can smell it. Rather, to make this more scientific have another person create the smoke in a sealed room in your house [make sure forced air systems are turned off] and then take you, blindfolded, into various rooms and have you identify which room or rooms contained the smoke. Be sure that the burnt paper remains in the room and that a new piece is used for any other room if more than one is to be contaminated with smoke. This should eliminate false positive results from crossover and from any expectation which may happen from you knowing in which room you made the smoke.

So did you smell smoke? If so then the smoke test tells you that the much smaller SARS CoV-2 virions bypass completely or go through the filtering membrane of the selected mask.

If you don’t want to test masks then there is another way to gain knowledge about whether a surgical type mask will inhibit the spread of the SARS CoV-2 virus through inhalation or exhalation. That is to check with the U.S. Government which has this to say about them:
“While a surgical mask may be effective in blocking splashes and large-particle droplets, a face mask, by design, does not filter or block very small particles in the air that may be transmitted by coughs, sneezes, or certain medical procedures.” [emphasis added] This advisory went on to state that N95 masks are designed to offer some protection from small particles. Keep this thought in mind; “surgical masks” are designed to not protect against the transmission of small vapor particles while N95 masks are designed to inhibit some small vapor particles.

The “small particles” referred to in that quote by the US Government does not refer to the virus particle but a water vapor droplet as is typically expelled by a person during a sneeze or cough. These are the droplets that you can see by exhalling onto a cold piece of glass. They can each carry thousands of virions.

Those small mucosal particles expelled from coughing or sneezing which range from 0.5 - 20 micrometers can remain in the air for long periods. In measuring the virion and smoke particles I used a nanometer as a measurement. A nanometer is 1/1000 of a micrometer. So doing the conversion to nanometers we find that the mucosal particle can be up 20,000 nanometers or 100 to 400 times larger than the SARS CoV-2 virion.

Quite clearly what the U.S. Government is saying is that BY DESIGN a surgical mask is meant to block large particle droplets [those which can be seen by the unaided eye at a distance] but that they do not filter [meaning small particles pass through the membrane] or block [meaning that air can bypass the loose fitting mask] small particles [which are up to 20,000 nanometers] emitted by coughs or sneezes. Sneezes can project air particles [with numerous virus particles attached] at up to 200mph with such great force as to project the mask away from the face both forcing particles through and around the mask. If you are cutting into an infected body that may be pumping blood at 150psi [about 5 times the pressure in a car tire] and it sprays across your face the surgical mask, by design, is meant to block transmission of the virus from those blood droplets. That is why it is called a “surgical mask”.

So, now that you know that the US Government says that “surgical masks” by design do not prevent the transmission of small particles [which are up to 20,000 nanometers] you may be wondering why anyone would recommend wearing them to protect against passing a 50-200 nanometer virion. It could be that those making the recommendation want the virus to spread but I am not making any conspiracy claims. I have a different claim. Before I get to that I present an anecdote about a hospital practice.

A friend of mine spent a few days at Witham Hospital in Lebanon, Indiana following a surgery recently. She was not required to wear any type of mask while in her room. Numerous staff members who came into her room did not wear masks. When she was out of her room she was required to wear a mask. The surgeons and associated staff wore surgical masks. Other staff who wore masks generally wore the N95 type. Apparently those in a professional medical setting must know something about the futility of wearing a surgical mask for purposes other than surgery.

Finally, I close with two more quotes from the US Government. “The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) does not recommend that the general public wear N95 respirators to protect themselves from respiratory diseases, including coronavirus.” Next is a quote from a paper about whether a protective recommendation should be made. “However, the cost of following this recommendation would be considerable, especially when extending the scope of measure to all people with risk of infection around the world.” So is the motivation to actually reduce the transmission or just give a low cost appearance that one is trying to achieve that goal? Hmmmmmm. Well a few days ago I did write about covert intentions.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Make a suggestion for me to write about.

Parents who would like to achieve the best outcome for their children in a contested child custody case should visit my website and contact my scheduler to make an appointment to meet with me. Attorneys may request a free consultation to learn how I can maximize their advocacy for their clients.

Connect with me for the latest Indiana child custody related policy considerations, findings, court rulings and discussions.

Tweet

Subscribe to my child custody updates

* indicates required

Email Address *

First Name

Last Name

©2008, 2020 Stuart Showalter, LLC. Permission is granted to all non-commercial entities to reproduce this article in its’ entirety with credit given.

StuartShowalter.com

COVID-19 Uncovering Covert Intentions

A more comprehensive title for this rationation would be Uncovering Covert Intentions through voiding false premises by exposing logical contradictions. Essentially, what I intend to do here is show how you can determine whether someone making a claim demonstrates a prima facia showing that the claim is valid. More important is being able to void the claim by demonstrating a logical contradiction put forth by the claimant. Once that is done then you can be on your way to uncovering the true intentions of the claimant.

Did you ever hear the claim by advocates of mandatory vaccinations for school children? They first claimed that “vaccines prevent illness”. Without doing any investigation about the efficacy of vaccines you will be able to dismiss the mandatory vaccination proposal and close the issue.

These advocates provided a warrant for their proposition that vaccines must be compulsory and administered to children against the will of their parents. The basis of that warrant was that the children of parents who chose to have them vaccinated are being put at-risk by associating with unvaccinated children who may be infected.

The two claims are a logical contradiction. If claim one is true -- that vaccines are effective -- then claim two -- that vaccinated children are at risk of contracting an ailment -- is a contradiction.

Once this contradiction is uncovered the proposition that vaccines should be mandatory fails and MUST be dismissed. Upon the moment that second claim is made the debate ends and the proposal is voided.

Recently there have been numerous claims made in regard to Covid-19 and the SARS CoV-2 virus.

You may have heard the claim a few months ago that mandatory business closures were implemented to reduce person-to-person contact and promote well-being by protecting people from possible transmission of the SARS CoV-2 virus. That appears to be a reasonable proposition.

There was a qualification on business closures as not ALL businesses were closed. Therein lies the second claim; some goods needed to remain available to consumers because they were essential to humans and banning those sales would do greater harm such as starving people who couldn’t buy food or sickening those who couldn’t get drugs. That also appears reasonable and consistent with the first claim But it is not.

To find the logical contradiction here one needs to look at what the politicians have deliberately constructed to be the list of essential businesses. I was in Las Vegas at the time that the casinos were closed when the mandatory closures went into effect. However, I was still able to go shopping and spent nearly an hour in a store pawing through hundreds of DVDs to find a few to add to my collection. What was more striking though is that liquor stores remain open in Nevada and numerous other states which have implemented mandatory business closures.

That is the contradiction. Alcohol is not essential to human survival and, quite to the contrary, the effects of alcohol have demonstrated a much greater harm to human well-being than any possible good derived from its consumption. This is such a well known fact that a court could take judicial notice of it.

It is when this contradiction is uncovered that the proposition that businesses are being closed to reduce viral transmission and promote human well-being fails and MUST be dismissed. Upon the moment that liquor stores are allowed to remain open the debate ends, the proposal is voided and the state governors who made such orders are exposed as liars - the highest form of human degenerates.

The true intentions exposed

The actual basis for the various deprivations imposed upon us throughout the Covid-19 / SARS CoV-2 panic response is to test our resolve and our willingness to capitualte and subject ourselves to inconveniences and greater burdens so that others may profit. The denial of our right to engage in free market transactions has been invited by business. Let me be clear on that. The business community wants the government to impose restrictions on free markets.

Super corporations, airlines as an example, have always invited the government to impose more restrictions and regulatory requirements on them. Thus, increasing their costs to operate. This paradox is easily understood when the element of profit and competition is examined.

If all it took to start an airline was buying planes and hiring staff then with $100,000,000 you are up and running. If it fails you sell off the planes at a small loss and may be out 20%. However, if there is an additional $100,000,000 in regulatory start-up costs and it fails then there is a 60% loss. A much riskier investment. Existing airlines like this because the annual regulatory costs are only $10,000,000. They willingly pay that amount to severely limit potential competitors from trying to enter the market. Those costs, which all of the existing competitors bear, are passed onto the consumer. It is basically a legal way of creating a cartel.

The list of “essential” businesses which are allowed to remain open during this panic were carefully crafted for the purpose of reducing competition. Take restaurants for example. What happens to the diner that is located in a strip, maybe around a courthouse square, that is independently owned and does 100% of its sales as dine-in? It is structurally locked by businesses on either side. Thus, there is no way to install a drive-up window. Out back is an alley with dumpsters. In front is a street or fire-lane / parking lot driveway. Curbside pick-up is difficult at best and illegal at worst. So where do these customers go? They go a few blocks away to the stand alone chain restaurant that has the same drive-through operation in all of it’s 10,000 locations.

Then there are all the other walk-in service based businesses such as banks. By closing their lobbies they force customers to use on-line options or the drive-through teller or machine. Necessary in-person transactions are done by appointment only. Instead of a lobby with five clerks waiting to serve customers at their whim, sometimes with only one busy, there are now three but all are busy because customers can easily see the que and decide whether to wait or return when the line is shorter. Appointments are made during times when drive through transactions are known to be low.

The service companies profit in numerous ways. Reduced staff, lower cleaning and maintenance costs and reduced liability insurance as customers are no longer in the building. Some businesses are going so far as to close branches and consolidate operations. Customers can drive an extra mile or two which they do. They can’t walk in anyway.

The big benefit for business is that the customers greatly reduce the financial burdens on the business while still paying the same price. Look at the S&P 500 stock index and the total Gross Domestic Product [GDP] in a historical context. In the first three months of 2020 the GDP dropped by 5%. Yet, the S&P 500 has not been affected nearly to the degree that it has been during times of lower GDP contraction in the past. For instance, when GDP dropped by 2.5% in the year 2009 the S&P 500 dropped over 38% for the year 2008 or 15% for every 1% drop in GDP. The S&P drop occurred in 2008 because investors anticipated that consumer spending was going to drop significantly in 2009 which was reflected by the GDP decline of 2009. Conversely the S&P is nearly flat for the year, currently down only 1% for 2020.

So why would the S&P 500 fare much better now when the drop in revenue is double that of the 2009 contraction? Because it is more profitable for businesses to lose 5% of revenue while cutting costs by 6% or more. Simply put, in 2008 the mega corporations didn’t plan for nor help orchestrate the drop in revenue. More telling is to look where the current decline in revenue is happening. You bet it isn’t in the giant corporations that make up the S&P 500 index. The restaurant that has 10,000 locations and has absorbed the customers of the now closed local diner is in the S&P 500 index while the local diner is not.

If you think that companies like Amazon and eBay are not part of a scheme to promote a paradigm shift in forcing consumers to get their goods outside of the traditional brick and mortar locations then think again. eBay actually implemented a policy months ago prohibiting the sale of goods that may be used to reduce the spread of a viral contagion. It is good for eBay if more people contract and spread the SARS CoV-2 virus because that justifies closing brick and mortar businesses. Netflix is certainly a beneficiary of movie theaters being closed.

So when you hear a politician or corporation telling you that some restriction or denial of service is being imposed upon you for your safety you can tell them to sell that $#!* to the ignorant folks because you aren’t buying their profiteering scheme.

Finally, just a quick note about personal health. Don’t let your health decisions be based upon what lawyers feel that they can potentially persuade a jury to believe. The defendant, company X, is liable to the plaintiff who contracted the virus at work because X did not exercise due diligence in taking proactive remediation efforts such as requiring employees to wear dust or surgical masks. I’ll write about that next.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Make a suggestion for me to write about.

Parents who would like to achieve the best outcome for their children in a contested child custody case should visit my website and contact my scheduler to make an appointment to meet with me. Attorneys may request a free consultation to learn how I can maximize their advocacy for their clients.

Connect with me for the latest Indiana child custody related policy considerations, findings, court rulings and discussions.

Tweet

Subscribe to my child custody updates

* indicates required

Email Address *

First Name

Last Name

©2008, 2020 Stuart Showalter, LLC. Permission is granted to all non-commercial entities to reproduce this article in its’ entirety with credit given.

StuartShowalter.com .

The Effective Weight Loss Diet

The weight loss diet industry has been a thriving business since, well, long before my emergence from the womb. Throughout my corporeal existence I have seen many diet fads come and go. No fat was once all the rage, then there was high protein, various shake concoctions, low carb and numerous other category specific proscriptions. Yet, I look around and still see behemoths on motorized carts who have been on diets.

Various “experts” have theorized that all of these diets have failed for specific reasons. I contend that such experts have failed in providing an accurate analysis because they are trying to make a simple explanation seem complicated. They do this so as to justify the need for their expertise.

You could have me look at a car which won’t start and I could give a long-winded explanation using the auto mechanic jargon while providing the technical reasons. The fuel pump is failing to deliver an appropriate amount of fuel to the combustion chambers relevant to the air content, which is regulated by the air/fuel mixture valve, being sufficient for the spark plug to ignite and produce deflagration of the fuel. Or I could say, It’s out of gas.

In similarly simple terms, diets don’t fail; people do. So here I will give you a simple two-step plan for easy weight loss.

Step 1: Eat Food
That seems obvious and it should. People often overlook the obvious though. Think of the combustion engine that wouldn’t start. Simply eating food, regardless of amount, will result in weight loss for an overweight person. Food is that which feeds. To feed is to nourish. Thus, food is that which nourishes the body; provides for cell growth and replacement, maintains and replaces neurotransmission minerals, maintains homeostasis, and provides a source of workload energy. Whatever does that is a food.

Step 2: Maintain a Food Journal
This is a corollary to an expenditures journal which, when maintained, reduces spending. A food journal simply details what was eaten and when. It can also be supplemented to include feelings or drug use as associated with foods. Here is my food journal for a recent day.

0730 tea

1100 zucchini, celery, white onion, orange bell pepper,garbanzo beans, olive oil, turmeric, coriander, kelp powder

1200 tea

1300 carrot, pistachio, cherries with sugar and oil washed, red apple

1400 smoothie - banana, apple, peach, cranberry, fenugreek powder, licorice powder, ginger powder, ginkgo powder

1500 Alaskan Pollock

1600 tea

1630 carrot, apple, lime, peanut butter

1730 asparagus, zucchini, celery, white onion, orange bell pepper,garbanzo beans, olive oil, coriander, kelp powder

1900 smoothie - banana, apple, peach, pear, fenugreek powder, licorice powder, ginger powder, ginkgo powder

2000 tea

2100 white onion, zucchini, broccoli, tuna

2200 carrot, apple, orange, walnuts

2300 green beans with salt washed

2400 smoothie - banana, apple, peach, pear, fenugreek powder, licorice root powder, ginger powder, ginkgo powder

0200 carrot, cherry with sugar and oil washed, orange, walnuts

0400 carrot, cherry with sugar and oil washed, orange, walnuts

This is rather typical for my daily eating. I do enjoy eating. Here I have indicated when sugar, salt or oil was added to the food but presumably washed off by me. If I eat at the buffet and get a slab of Salmon with some unidentifiable goo on it then I simply wash it and enter it in the journal as “salmon”. Cardinal rule I follow is - I do not eat what I cannot identify.

As you can see it is quite simple to write down every food ingredient consumed throughout the day. Don’t be put off by the length of my list as I consume much more food [daily about 6-7% of body weight not inclusive of drink] than is typical of most people. I do enjoy eating and I likely have a higher caloric output than most people. If done electronically [not preferred] the copy and paste function can make it easier but diminishes a purpose of maintaining a food journal and allows for entries to be easily skipped if the device is not available. A small notebook is preferable.

My food consumption varies widely as I will eat any fruit or vegetable. I do eat the entire food except for onion and pineapple for which I remove their coverings. I generally eat almonds, hot peppers and garlic on a daily basis but my stock was depleted on this particular day.

Maintaining a food journal does not mean that you must forgo restaurants. As one of my weight loss clients said, “I can still go out to eat and be healthy. Even gas stations have fresh fruit available.” Here is the ingredient list for a Subway Monterey Cheddar bun which was obtained from the Subway website; wheat flour, water, yeast, sugar, soybean oil, calcium carbonate, wheat gluten, salt, sunflower lecithin, ascorbic acid, yeast extract, Vitamin D2, enzymes, cultured pasteurized milk, annatto color, potato starch, powdered cellulose, natamycin. Add to that the selected fresh contents plus the ingredients list, also obtainable from the website, of any goo squirted onto the fresh contents.

So, even if you don’t prepare your own food it is still easy to maintain the food journal by writing down the ingredients from a website. If you select a candy or other snack from a bowl around the office just ask whomever is responsible to see the package or get the product name so you may obtain the ingredient list for such rote consumption.

Another general dietary principle to follow is to avoid added sugars. That is one of the things on my list of Laws of Contradictory Inverse Proportional Relations. The Sugar Principle says as food availability and security increases, while the rate of technology and automation place lower caloric demands on humans for them to maintain the necessities of living, the caloric density of foods increase.

We are no longer a hunting and gathering population looking for high calorie foods to meet our bodies’ high calorie demands from great physical exertion. Neither do we need to maintain a large store of fat to survive periods of food scarcity. Through the conflux of these factors low calorie foods eaten purely for enjoyment should now be more prevalent. However, the opposite is true. So why this contradiction? Food adulterers often add sugar to their products to give the perception of greater value by having a higher calorie to dollar ratio. I have seen sugar added to canned Sardines.

Another reason sugar is added to foods is so manufacturers can recover some costs for foods that spoiled or became moldy. You’ll notice this in canned pastas or nut butters. They are heated to high temperatures and then sugar and salt are added to mask the rotten flavour and to help boost any retained original flavour. So, it is best overall to avoid anything that has any added sugars.

The final dietary principle I suggest for people to follow is to identify the nutritional benefit of each ingredient consumed. Are you aware of the nutritional value of consuming maltitol? How about FD&C Blue No. 5? Look at ADHD and other anxiety related neurological conditions.

In closing I dispel the popular myth that humans naturally get fatter as they age. It is common and normal to do so when normal is presented in the context of what usually happens. However, there is no direct correlation between normal and natural here. Humans get fatter as they age because of a caloric imbalance. That is, their caloric processing and absorbortion exceeds their caloric output.

I am now 10 pounds heavier, 137 pounds, than when I was a professional cyclist 30 years ago. That is due to two factors; 1] more muscle, and 2] I haven’t fully shed the weight I put on for winter to help keep warm. The photographer said I am “chiseled” but I insist I am still a bit chubby and have four pounds of fat yet to be shed.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Make a suggestion for me to write about.

Parents who would like to achieve the best outcome for their children in a contested child custody case should visit my website and contact my scheduler to make an appointment to meet with me. Attorneys may request a free consultation to learn how I can maximize their advocacy for their clients.

Connect with me for the latest Indiana child custody related policy considerations, findings, court rulings and discussions.

Tweet

Subscribe to my child custody updates

* indicates required

Email Address *

First Name

Last Name

©2008, 2020 Stuart Showalter, LLC. Permission is granted to all non-commercial entities to reproduce this article in its’ entirety with credit given.

StuartShowalter.com

Black Lives Matter and perpetuating Racism

With clear intent I have avoided watching a video of the George Floyd homicide. This is to help maintain an objective perspective in addressing the issue of race and particularly the “Black Lives Matter” movement.

First, let me give you some background on me in regards to race. In grade 1 I had a best friend who was from a nearly opposite class background as myself but that didn’t matter to me. I would see him and run to him and give him a hug and kiss on the cheek. It would so embarrass him. His race was black. Throughout my schooling I had friends across a range of class and racial distinctions.

I enjoyed going to the International Festival, an annual event in Indianapolis that showcased the attributes of various cultures or ethnic groups. As I trudged through high school I became more interested in race and racial politics.

Racial injustice piqued my interest. The more I observed and learned the more I became grounded in three basic principles; 1] the government should stay out of matters related to race, 2] that separation of races, particularly when self-imposed, will reduce racial conflict, and 3] pursuing equality among races [or equality in general] leads to tyranny.

While there are few instances which I could point to that helped to solidify these positions there is one I can clearly recall. Although there was a high school miles closer to some of my black classmates they were brought there to, at least to my perception, achieve a racial politics goal. I can recall some white students referring to black students coming to “our school” as though it belonged to the white students. Secondly, it took those black students away from their neighborhood and likely nearby friends who went to the neighborhood school.

These political actions peeved me. Let people the hell alone and allow them to live their lives as they wish, was my thought. But no. Racial statistics seemed to be more important than the wishes of the people. During and shortly after high school I either went to meetings regarding various racial groups or spoke with people involved. I proposed my first principle to all.

I got the cold shoulder at every turn. While all groups seemed to profess seeking an end to racism and equal opportunity [equity] regardless of race none wanted to eliminate the tool of racism and racial discrimination; racial classification. Particularly if it was imposed by the government. That was until I came across one loosely aligned group; the white power movement.

I found a home there. They did want the government to get out of the racial discrimination business. They did want people to be able to self-segregate themselves. They did oppose the tyranny of equality.

Of course they had some drawbacks. They denigrated other races and some held a virulent hatred toward other races. Then there was the well-established rift between skinheads and the Klan. If you believe in a principle then proudly stand up and espouse that principle. Don’t be two-faced and hide behind a damn hood. Or the modern day equivalent of an on-line screen name that is not your given name.

Another hypocrisy I encountered was some of the skinheads who didn’t like my friendship with Olympic medalist Nelson Vails. He was a black man married to a white woman. Don’t dare come to me with your proposition that the government shouldn’t force us to intermingle with black people in employment or whatever and then tell me that I can’t choose to do so if I so desire. I make my friendships based on the integrity of the person.

The most vociferous opponent of the white power movement I encountered was Jewish based organizations. They were the most hypocritical. For someone to talk about doing away with racism but then to segregate themselves into communities, to show discriminatory practices when hiring employees or choosing business suppliers, and to disqualify their offspring from marrying certain people, all based on their race is the greatest hypocrisy.

I am all for discriminating. I will choose products made by a non-union workforce over a union workforce without hesitation or comparison of quality. I discriminate based upon likelihood of quality or on ethical principles. However, I won’t profess to judge each product based upon it’s quality and then discriminate based upon ethic principles. While I will readily discriminate by using a vast range of categories I don’t use race to make a judgment of character. This is where I think Martin Luther King fell short.

He stated, "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.". That may simply have been intended as a primary step. As for a final goal, as it appeared to me, I think it fell short. Rather, a more laudable goal I reason is a day when we no longer use race as a social classification.

Race is entrenched in our thinking and, thus, language. When describing a person we often use a racial marker first. This is done although other markers may be more distinctive and narrowing. Male cuts out half the population. Age 60s narrows it considerably. Caucasian knocks out a few more. In some situational circumstances race may be more efficient. Fifty people are in a room including a black couple comprised of a man and woman. You need only say black woman and I know of whom you refer. With great consistency however race is used as a primary marker. Hence, it’s considered most important. At least that is the implicit message that we receive subconsciously.

Care should be exercised when making utterances. Once it is said it cannot be redacted from the mind. In the legal community we all give a wink to “the jury shall disregard that comment” instruction. They can’t!

Race is also entrenched by government usage. There it is used as a means of control. I saw clearly through first-hand experience how the government attempts to perpetuate racial conflict among the populace.

As a youngster, rising to national prominence in the white power scene, the US DOJ targeted me and took on the responsibility of providing for my general care and needs. As I made my way as far north as Minnesota, out to the great plains, and then down to the Bayou I was isolated in or turned away from various prisons. I settled in Louisiana [lousyana] and with lightning rapidity I ran my unit and generally stood as the go to guy for the white boys.

However, I associated with members of all races. A principle that I held while I was there is that there are only two kinds of people here; those being held in and those holding us in. Race didn’t matter. My associations caught the attention of the staff. I would get called into the Lieutenant’s Office and interrogated regularly about who I was seen with and what we were talking about before being admonished not to loiter in groups. There were also regular trips to the segregation unit for me. Ha, you put me in prison for not following rules and then expect me to follow rules. Sorry Charlie!

What concerned the prison staff is that I was unifying prisoners across racial lines. The government doesn’t want us to be harmonious amongst each other. If we are harmonious, then, like in the micro-society of prison, we have a unified enemy; the government oppressor.

So onto the central topic. “Black Lives Matter”

Language is critical in persuasive motivation. Consider the Emotion Recognition Task. The researchers who designed it used a human model to give facial expressions reflecting the seven basic emotions. During an evaluation the research subjects are to identify which emotion is expressed by the model’s face. The subjects are asked which expression “agrees” with an emotion choice. The researchers particularly chose not to ask which expression “accurately” shows an emotion choice. This is because that would skew the results when presented to people like me. I would doubt that the model experienced the seven particular emotions during the one sitting for the photos.

The position statement “Black Lives Matter” is illustrated more clearly by looking at it’s mathematical inversion which is: “NOT-Black Lives do NOT Matter”.

I saw a posting on Facebook which stated that anyone who said that it means the lives of people of other races does not matter doesn’t understand the phrase. But in analysing it mathematically it is clear and succinct: “NOT-Black Lives do NOT Matter”. The author of that posting went into a lengthy explanation using a biblical reference about 100 sheep and the shepherd going after one who got away while the others were left asking, “do we not matter?”

I readily concede that “Black Lives Matter'' may not be intended to say “NOT-Black Lives do NOT Matter”. But as a first impression statement of principle, which is exactly what that is, it does say that. However, it may be redeemed through explanation such as the sheep analogy.

You have likely attempted something akin in the past. You are queried and immediately respond “yes” and upon instantaneously catching a glimpse of horror on the face of the inquisitor or bystanders you seek to clarify. “I, uh, well I don’t mean that you are fat but it’s just the cut of those pants that gives that impression.” Give up and leave. You just forever called her fat.

The same can be attempted after someone is exposed to the phrase “Black Lives Matter”. Immediately give a clarification using a sheep analogy or whatever. Do so that the person can hear it, process it, and override the first impression all within about one second, give or take 30 micro-seconds, of first hearing “Black Lives Matter”. That way it may not become embedded. “Black Lives Matter”

The statement “Black Lives Matter” conveys a position of principle. The analogy about sheep conveys a position for action priorities such as a triage protocol. Those in greatest danger are tended to first. To make the biblical reference analogous to “Black Lives Matter” the story needs tweaked a bit which I will do.

“Sheep Lives Matter” will be the position statement. Now 50 sheep and 50 lambs are in the pen. Two of each escape before the shepherd latches the gate. He then goes after the two wayward sheep while the other 96 animals in the pen wait to be fed. When the shepherd returns with the two sheep the others ask, “do we not matter?” The shepherd responds, “Well sure you do but my action protocol requires that I tend to those most in danger first.” “Well what about those two lambs”, the other animals ask. “Oh they are wolf food by now”, says the Shepherd, “No one told me that all animals' lives matter.”

ANYTIME race is used as a marker it is used for the purpose of exclusion - discrimination. Anyone who continues to use racial identifiers for sociological purposes does so to perpetuate racism or racial classification.

From my perspective, based upon vast life experiences including significant study of racial politics, sociology, and psychology, we should all espouse the idea that “All Lives Matter”. Concurrently, that there is a systemic bias in law enforcement against people based upon class, and to a lesser extent, race.

Those who espouse that “Black Lives Matter” are likewise saying “NOT-Black Lives do NOT Matter”. There is no other valid interpretation. They are perpetuating racial conflict. When you tell me that you stand for equity and that “All Lives Matter” then you have found a confederate to help you end racial prejudice and injustice.

But when you tell me that my life doesn’t matter then you can just go %$#@ yourself.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Make a suggestion for me to write about.

Parents who would like to achieve the best outcome for their children in a contested child custody case should visit my website and contact my scheduler to make an appointment to meet with me. Attorneys may request a free consultation to learn how I can maximize their advocacy for their clients.

Connect with me for the latest Indiana child custody related policy considerations, findings, court rulings and discussions.

Tweet

Subscribe to my child custody updates

* indicates required

Email Address *

First Name

Last Name

©2008, 2020 Stuart Showalter, LLC. Permission is granted to all non-commercial entities to reproduce this article in its’ entirety with credit given.

StuartShowalter.com