Proposition: All Automotive Design Engineers/Designers Have To Work Three Years As A Mechanic Before Starting

Lots to say, lots going on in the world for good or for ill. However, Life intervened when the water pump on my car went out (rather spectacularly) Friday, thankfully after I had purchased it’s replacement. However, instead of having someone else install it as planned, I had to put it on myself since it wasn’t moving from where I had nursed it home and into the driveway.

It’s been a while since I’ve done auto mechanics, but it did get done. About six or more times the time estimate for a real mechanic, but that’s okay. Only real issue was overheating badly on Saturday while working on it. Finished up and cleaned up Sunday, then worked on recovery from the heat.

Which leads to the above proposition. It used to be that you could get in to work on most things rather easily. These days, not so much. You have to disassemble quite a bit to get to most anything. It’s all good on paper, but a PITA to really work on. I think that if the designers (and executives over them) had to work as mechanics for three years servicing things, we might see some serious improvements in design.

More soon.

You Can’t Stop The Signal, Though Big Tech Is Trying

Though no surprise that YouTube, owned by Google/Alphabet Inc., pulled down the latest video by Project Veritas that showed them engaging in election interference, I’m sad to see that Vimeo has joined them. The video in question is up on other sites, and it is worth watching. Putting it below just for the grins of it.

Meantime, Vimeo is off my list of potential YouTube replacements. Yes, I am looking at moving/reposting all videos on one or more alternate services as soon as possible. BitChute will get checked out, as if they PO’d PayPal that sounds like points in their favor…

Google Censors Expose Revealing Intent to Interfere In Election

There has been a growing amount of coverage of the intent by some in Big Tech to interfere in the upcoming elections to prevent the “Wrong” candidate from winning ever again. In fact, there is a good bit of coverage of that sentiment in several departments of Google. Project Veritas has just done a major expose on this — and to no surprise Google has censored the video from YouTube (which it owns). So, I urge you to go check out what is up at Project Veritas, and you may also want to check out this post at American Greatness. Hat Tip to Instapundit, who might (maybe?) possibly have a book out dealing with this that you may want to check out if it is out yet…

Meantime, here is the Project Vertias. Note to Google: You can’t stop the signal.

Cigar Review: Aganorsa Leaf

This is a little odd, but I need to start the review by noting that Casa Fernandez has changed it’s name to Aganorsa Leaf. This actually brings operations under the family tobacco growing operations, and is part of an ongoing effort to rebrand operations under a common banner.

At a recent event for their JFR cigars (excellent cigars for the price), I was given the opportunity to obtain one of the special Aganorsa Corojo cigars. On a recent Sunday morning, I fired it up and enjoyed it with a morning cup of coffee.

It had a nice medium body at the start, with woodsy notes on the early draw. Some definite cedar with some light spice notes, along with a bit of a bite on the finish. As the first third progressed, more spice notes came in, including pepper, making for a very nice build in flavor.

Midway through, it mellowed a bit with the spice notes moving to the higher end. The final third moved back to a solid body with plenty of flavor as the wood and spice ramped back up. It did not burn hot until the very end.

All-in-all, a good smoke though it did burn a bit unevenly on the final third. It paired well with both black and fortified coffee. On a technical note, the cigar was punched and lit with a jet lighter.

The Assassination Of Forgiveness

The Assassination of Forgiveness 

In watching the news, I’ve noticed several stories where past words or actions have cost people jobs, college acceptances, and more.  It doesn’t matter how many years ago the words or actions took place, the person must be punished now.  

There have been some good and interesting points raised in response.  A common theme on the conservative side is that it is part and parcel of being a post-Christian nation.  A more libertarian approach has been to lament that one can dig back far enough on anyone to find something, and that we really need to stop doing this.  A more rational approach has been to point out that people can learn and grow, and that as such we should not hold the past against the person that exists now.  

The idea of forgiveness is not new, nor is the related concept of rehabilitation.  However, neither has been the norm for much of the history of the world.  Hammurabic and other ancient codes focused on vengeance rather than forgiveness and rehabilitation.  An eye for an eye was the norm throughout most of the world.  

Indeed, the laws of many ancient societies were quite draconian by modern standards.  Slavery and death were widely used punishments, and the actions of one could land a whole family in permanent slavery that extended to offspring.  Torture and maiming were more “moderate” responses for many.  

The key is that any such marked both individuals and family units.  Examples were made so that you saw the lifelong consequences of breaking the law.  There was very little forgiveness, and rehabilitation was largely limited to a minuscule amount that was of use to the governments/leadership in question.  Such rehabilitated were, with certain rare exceptions, never fully trusted again.  

While you can find at least some small amount of forgiveness and/or rehabilitation in some minor philosophies/religions around the world, it truly did not become widespread until the rise of Christianity.  

While forgiveness is a key point to Christianity, rehabilitation is an inferred point.  An inferred point that came to have a huge impact.  

The idea of forgiveness come from Judaic beliefs as outlined in the Old Testament.    A recurring theme is God forgiving his people when they (repeatedly) screwed up.  Which we did (and do) on a regular basis.  This led to the concept of forgiving others who wronged us.  In the Gospels, Jesus expands on this and makes it a formal part of the New Covenant:  as God forgives you your sins, so too should you forgive those who wronged you.  

There is, of course, a lot more too it than that, but this is a column and not a theology dissertation.  I’m just hitting the high points, and am going to do the same for the other key point:  rehabilitation.  

The early Church was given the mission of spreading the Gospels and conversion, with Jesus formally passing  on the ability to forgive sins, as had he, to the Apostles.  Like the concept of Purgatory, the idea of penance grew out of a mixture of tradition (sacrifice to appease God and gain forgiveness) and inference from the words of the Apostles.  Forgiveness was not automatic.  Rather, it was earned by sincere repentance and by doing a task or tasks as penance (punishment) so as to earn that forgiveness.  

Punishment, repentance, forgiveness.  This was quite a concept, and it soon found use outside the Church and became, arguably, a major philosophical concept within the Enlightenment.  The idea that someone who had done wrong could be punished and then released to “sin no more” had appeal.  It allowed productive members of society to be retained (even if they had to move to escape the stigma) while keeping them from becoming a drain on society via crippling, etc.  Yes, I’m oversimplifying and skipping a few steps/centuries.  See above.  

This is a concept that has grown and evolved over the centuries.  It is important for many reasons.  Which is why it and related concepts are hated by authoritarian regimes/philosophies.  

At their core, Christianity and the Enlightenment (and yes, I know the Enlightenment was in many ways a reaction to the Catholic Church) are about the individual.  The Gospels make it clear:  the choice is yours to accept or reject Christ as your savior.  Yes, Christ died for the sins of the world, but the choice to accept that gift is left up to each individual.  The Enlightenment took things further, holding that each individual had both the capability and the responsibility for deciding what was right for them.  No kings or others needed, you can figure it out on your own.  A radical concept that still sits bad with some — I know at least one Catholic scholar who refers to it as “The Endarkenment.”  

For the purposes of my thesis here, both Christianity and the Enlightenment support individualism.  Which is why both are attacked, derided, and persecuted by those of an authoritarian stripe.  Which also extends to the concepts of justice, punishment/penance, and forgiveness that arise from both.  

Authoritarian regimes can brook no dissent and demand the individual be subsumed to the greater good that is the authoritarian state.  Religion is despised for many reasons, with Christianity despised above all because of that core of individualism as well as its allegiance to a higher power.  There can be no power, no religion, but the state and what thoughts it has right then.  

The same goes for forgiveness and rehabilitation.  Authoritarian regimes can’t afford to forgive and forget.  That enemy will always be an enemy, as if they break with any part of the system they break with all.  Therefore, examples must be made, and since authoritarian regimes must always have an enemy against which the people to hate and rage…  

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was a master of this.  Dissidents and others were persecuted; those who broke the law became permanent examples to the rest.  A few political types were “rehabilitated” if they admitted they are wrong and the State/Party were right and to be obeyed — but they were never trusted again and a number seemed to fade away permanently not long after.  The National Socialist German Workers Party (yep, the Nazi’s) did it too.  

And today we see it again.  Once a thought criminal, always a thought criminal.  The concepts of personal growth, forgiveness, penance, and such are verboten.  The concept of context is verboten:  there is only wrongthink and it must be destroyed.  That it also eliminates all other outside reference to any other systems/civilizations/etc. is a benefit since no authoritarian regime/philosophy can last if there is anything else to which it can be compared (the Taliban and the Buddha’s), especially if that comparison can show that things were or could be better.  All speech, writing, art, broadcasts, thoughts, etc. must be controlled.  

There is more to this, of course, but this sets the basis for continuing discussions and explorations.  There is a very deliberate attempt to assassinate forgiveness and other key beliefs of Western Civilization.  What we are witnessing now, and have been for a while, are the opening volleys aimed at removing them from our lives.