Why Stats Fail in Sports, and Why AI Will Fail Us

I should not even have to write this.

But I will.

Using stats to run a team in basketball or baseball does not work.

It does not work because players are not islands to themselves. Their individual stats are products of the players around them.

To give a quick example, Michael Jordan was a product of Scottie Pippin (and others). And visa versa.

If you take Michael Jordan out of that equation and place him somewhere else, the result will not be the same.

Teams particularly the Philadelphia 76ers think that you can manufacture a team by statistics.

They think you can take a James Harden from here, a Joel Embiid, from there a Tyrese Maxey from still over there and come up with a great team.

Well how did that work out for the past two years?

Not well.

Can you paint a masterpiece using paint by numbers?

Did Picasso paint that way?

Can you analyze all the great painters, look for commonalities and then derive the ideal painter and the manufacture him a la Frankenstein,

That’s what Dr. Frankenstein did. He assembled a monster out of parts.

He placed together parts from different people, and these parts had no organic connection to each other.

This is what the Philly Sixers have been doing for several years now.

And the results are in.

It doesn’t work.

What the Sixers have assembled is a collection of very good players who do not complement each other.

A good team fits together like Gleason and Carney, Abbott and Costello. You can separate them but the synergy goes far beyond their individual talents.

Statistics can’t account for this.

It can not because the very essence of statistics is to isolate items for study while removing other variables.

We want to know about Jordan. If we include Pippin, we are not knowing Jordan. We are knowing Jordan and Pippin.

The problem with that is that other teams aren’t hiring Jordan and Pippin; they just want Jordan.

But if a team did want Jordan and Pippin, they would then be isolated on just that combo.

They are still losing synergy between the Jordan-Pippin combo and the other members of the team.

And so it keeps going.

***

AI will fail.

AI will fail because inherently AI is based upon mathematical regularity, orderliness, linearity and of course algorithms.

The basis of this ultimately is the impregnated binary structure of the computer.

AI can not and will not take the intuitive loop to think outside what is provided to it.

Intuition is not based upon what is logical. Intuition is based upon what is not logical.

Any perceived dramatic insights achieved by AI will be rehashed options thought to be undiscovered but in reality cold meals from a time ago.

The bases of AI are algorithms and mass data.

Mass data if it is to only include statistical data is the other problem for reasons explained above.

The algorithm though is the main problem. It forces one into a stultifying and often labyrinthine maze of structured choices that force one to consider a before b, then b before c, rather than think about all at the same time.

Moreover, the algorithm forces you to choose one path or the other. But what if true intelligence chooses both pathways?

This maze of structured choices is overcome by raw computing speed, a feat humans do not ordinarily achieve.

That’s why we use computers. We set them up so that we can do things that we can’t do. But that doesn’t mean that computers can do everything better than us. One of the reasons we are so slow as human beings is because we do not use structured algorithms when we think. Our brains do not work as computers.

If our brains didn’t work as computers, we wouldn’t be able to have achieved the intuitive insights that have allowed us to progress.

Let’s look at Darwin’s theory of evolution. That seems like a logical starting place.

Could AI in any of it forms arrive at the theory of evolution? Would AI be able to churn out millions of conceptual models of life, test them out, then arrive at the correct one.

Looking at the problem, one would think: Sure! It seems logical.

Well, of course it seems logical. That’s because we already accept it.

But could it do it?

It can not because intuition requires a leap outside the logic of the day.

It requires that you bridge two events that currently have no recognized logical connection.

There is no logical connection between the arm of a man and the fin of a fish.

It is only Darwin’s – and now our theory – that unites the two.

Hence, AI will not add new insights, only an improved version of what we have now.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley

Copyright 2023 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Religion, Jews and Belief

So we should talk about a sensitive subject, because nobody wants to, and because the powers that be don’t want us to.

If ever, there was a reason to talk about a subject, it’s because the phony authorities consider it taboo.

I don’t think I’m going to come out with any definitive conclusions, but I am going to talk.

So with that stated, let’s talk about what it means to be Jewish. As a person who was raised in the Christian church, but who is not one who attends church, I feel I am more qualified than Jews to talk about the subject. I am more qualified because I’m not emotionally attached to the religion.

I wasn’t shanghaied into Judaism by my parents (just as Christians are shanghaied into their religion by their parents) and therefore feel emotionally attached to the religion out of loyalty to my parents.

That leads us to the first question. Is Judaism a religion, or is it an ethnicity. Or is it a way of living?

I have argued in the past that if you don’t practice the precepts of Judaism, you are not Jewish. Similarly if you do not practice the precepts of Christianity, you are not Christian.

I have stated clearly that there is no such thing as a cultural Jew just as there is no such thing as a cultural Christian.

Having a menorah down by the bar doesn’t qualify you as Jewish anymore than I having a Christmas tree in the living room qualifies me as Christian.

Obviously, people will disagree with this.

The point of this conversation is to destroy my opponents, to checkmate them into a humiliating nonexistence. Why else would I write this article?

Let’s begin with Max Baer. Max Baer was a hero to many Jewish people back in the day.

Max Baer was the heavyweight champion of the world and was reportedly Jewish.

But why was he Jewish?

Was he Jewish because he practiced the principles of Judaism, or was he Jewish because of his parents.

Well, as it turns out, Max Baer’s father was Jewish, but his mother was not.

According to many orthodox Jews, Judaism can only be transmitted through the mother

So, pretending for a second that Max Baer is still alive, which he is not, is Max Baer truly Jewish regardless of whether he practices Judaism or not?

Well, I suppose he is, if you accept Jewish identity as being able to trace your lineage back to the original Jews.

If that is the case, that all you need is a Jewish parent who is descended from Jews, then what about those Christians, who are ultimately descended from the Jews who lived during the time of Jesus?

What do I mean by this?

Many years ago I stated to a Jewish friend of mine that in the final analysis we were all Jews at one time.

He was shocked when I said that and said, “Oh, no.”

Why not? If being Jewish is nothing more than genetics and being able to trace your lineage back to the original Jews, then why don’t we Christians count also?

Some of us can trace our lineage back to the original Jews, right?

I mean, who was Jesus preaching to in his community? Buddhists?

Not at all. It seems totally logical that Jesus was converting Jews.

So again, I ask, why don’t we count?

Now, if you throw that argument out to a Jew, he probably won’t answer you except to say that you have to also follow the laws of Judaism.

At which point I will come back to you and say: Well, if that’s necessary, then what about those people who don’t follow the principles of Judaism at all but were born into a Jewish family.

What about those people today who commonly call themselves non-practicing Jews?

What about Meyer Lansky and Bugsy Siegel? They tortured and killed people with relish.

Why should they count if you just told me that you had to follow the laws of Judaism?

At which point you are checkmated, thank you, but we can continue anyway. I don’t mind carrying you for a few more rounds.

Perhaps you are of the persuasion that you have to meet both requirements. You have to be descended from Jews, and you have to follow the precepts of Judaism.

Fair point, but aren’t we leading back to the same arguments?

What about people who have been descended remotely from the Jews? What about people who barely practice Judaism?

Suppose I have a great grandmother, who was Jewish, but everybody in between was Catholic or Protestant. Do I count as a Jew if I choose choose to call myself that?

At what biological dilution does a person cease to become Jewish? 1/2? 1/4? 1/8? 1/16?

And who makes this decision?

How about those Jews who converted to Christianity? Are they Jews?

Really?

People who go around and celebrate Jesus are Jews?

Wouldn’t they fall into the same category as Jews for Jesus? My understanding is that orthodox rabbis are firmly of the opinion that Jews for Jesus are not Jews.

Karl Marx’s father converted to Christianity so that he would be able to pursue a career in law.

Karl Marx was raised as a Christian.

Was Karl Marx Jewish?

Many Jews think so, although I think they think that way because they never read any detailed biography of him.

Technically, I guess you can say that he had Jewish influence in his life and that his parents probably gave him values that were in line with Judaism. Just because your parents convert doesn’t mean that they change all their values on a dime.

Yet, Jewish scholars, at least the traditional ones, will state that you can’t become a Jew just by adopting a few values or precepts of Judaism.

So was Karl Marx Jewish even though he was raised as a Christian?

Some scholars have felt that Karl Marx was antisemitic? Can you be Jewish and antisemitic at the same time? I suppose you can. This might fall under the category of what has been termed the self-loathing Jew.

Are such people Jewish?

I suppose they are. You can be Jewish and hate Jews at the same time.

You can also do destructive things to the Jews and be Jewish at the same time, right? Look at the leadership of Israel. One can argue that they’re engaging in policies that will be ultimately harmful to Jews decades or possibly centuries down the line.

In the past century, the leadership of Israel has engaged in policies that are extremely harmful to the Palestinians. Is that brotherhood? Is that behavior in accordance with the Jewish values?

Will these policies in time engender blowback which will be harmful to the Jews? I think so.

So can we call the leadership of Israel nothing short of a pack of self-loathing Jews who are engaging in acts ultimately destructive towards Jews?

How could one possibly call the leadership of Israel Jewish when they don’t practice Jewish values, when they engage in practices which are ultimately destructive to Jews?

I don’t think you can. I think it’s more appropriate to call them pagans.

They may wear a kippah, they may have a menorah in their house, but that doesn’t make them Jewish.

You can’t possibly be Jewish because your parents were Jews. Nor can you be Jewish because your parents shanghaied you into a religion.

We are all shanghaied into a religion.

If you switched Jewish babies and Catholic babies at birth they would grow up within that religion.

Abraham Foxman’s parents had their nanny take care of Abraham while they went to a concentration camp in the 1940s. She promptly shanghaied him into Catholicism.

After the war was over, Abraham’s parents tried to reclaim young Abraham who was on a steady path to being a thoroughly indoctrinated Catholic.

After much difficulty, they were able to reclaim him and re-shanghai him back into Judaism.

So it should be clear that we are only of a religion because our parents kidnapped us on the weekend and browbeat us into that religion. They said to us: This is what you are going to believe, and we don’t care what you think.

So who are we kidding here?

I suppose the point I’m trying to make here is that religion is a device that man invented to keep people on the straight and narrow.

Since 90% of the people don’t know anything about their religion, and of the the 10% who do 90% don’t follow it, what’s the whole point of it?

Do you doubt me? Man on the street interviews can demonstrate that many Christians think Jesus was born in Nazareth.

One of my Jewish colleagues (college educated, a physician no less) didn’t understand why you don’t mix milk and meat together. He thought it was because of sanitary reasons. I explained to him that in Judaism milk represents life and meat represents death and that you don’t mix the two.

This type of ignorance applies to all religions.

So what’s the point of religion if people don’t practice it or don’t know much about it.

Does the religion exist for the people, or for the mad powerbrokers who rule the religion?

It seems to exist for the mad power brokers who have made convenient relationships with the ruling class.

Religion is then used as a tool to get people to fight useless wars or follow the ridiculous dictates of the ruling class.

That’s the situation in Israel today where many Israelis, who I will safely assume are Jewish, beat up on Palestinians, burn down their houses, or go to rallies in order to cheer for Elor Azaria, a former IDF solider, who essentially murdered a helpless Palestinian as he lie dying on the ground.

To be fair, Christians do the same thing.

All in the name of religion.

What insanity is this?

It is the product of being shanghaied into a religion.

It is the product of blind obedience.

This is not particular to Judaism. My parents tried to shanghai me into Christianity, but I was a problem child.

I viewed church as prison. Not only was I forcibly compelled to go to church, I wasn’t able to go out and play with other children after church. It was the Lord’s day, my parents told me.

Is the Lord opposed to children playing with their friends, I must’ve asked on some level.

If that is the case, count me out.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley

Copyright 2023 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Bazalel Smotrich and Reality

Read this.

In this article, Bezalel Smotrich states that there is no such thing as a Palestinian people..

Smotrich says there’s no Palestinian people, declares his family ‘real Palestinians’

This article merits commentary because it is wrong in so many ways.

The man, speaking up at the podium, Bezalel Smotrich, is an example of what happens when you propagandize a nation of people against an existing minority.

Of course, you know, this hatred of Palestinians is all backed up by the pigs in the United States of America and Great Britain, who created the state of Israel in order to control the Suez Canal, the eastern Mediterranean, and the oil and gas assets in the Middle East.

Regardless of what our leaders say, our phony leaders in the US are firmly behind the Jews in this conflict in this Middle East.

They always have been.

Mr. Smotrich is one of their propagandizers.

He is currently Israel’s Minister of Finance.

He reinforces the false beliefs to which many Jewish people in Israel are victim.

Here are some of the things that he says:

Who was the first Palestinian king? What language do the Palestinians have? Was there ever a Palestinian currency? Is there a Palestinian history or culture? Nothing. There is no such thing as a Palestinian people.” 

He said these things in a speech in Paris.

To begin with, Palestine has been continuously occupied by other empire states over the past 2500 years.

It’s a popular spot.

It has been occupied because it is a crossroads between Africa, Asia and Europe.

At various times Palestine has been occupied by the Greeks, the Romans, the Egyptians, the Persians, the Byzantines, and the Ottomans.  

Hey, even the Crusaders got in on the act.

Let’s not forget about Great Britain and the United States.

Nor the French. Napoleon beat us all to the holy land in 1797.

Yes, he was there.

Palestine has almost never been left to its own devices over the past 2500 years.

What language do the Palestinians have? Arabic.  That makes sense, right? What does language have to do with the price of eggs?

Who was the first Palestinian king?  Probably one the different occupiers who was living in the area.  Who is the King of South Texas? Probably the President of the United States.   Does that mean that there is not a distinct type of culture and people in South Texas?  Not at all.  Before the various Presidents of the United States, the King of South Texas was the leader of Mexico.  So what?

Kings are generally forced upon people.

Let’s not also forget that many of these Palestinians were probably Jews at one time if we go back far enough. The choice was between converting or dying.

Was there ever a Palestinian currency?  Sure, the currency that was imposed upon the people, or whatever currency they chose to adopt.

Gold?  Silver? 

El Salvador recently chose to employ Bitcoin as an alternative currency. Currently they use the dollar bill; does that mean that El Salvador does not have a distinctive culture? Not at all.

Is there a Palestinian history or culture?  Apparently there is;  if there wasn’t, why is Israel trying to wipe them out?  Obviously, right wing nut jobs like Mr. Smotrich view Palestinians as different.   And that is because they are.  They have their own culture and their own ways of doing things. This can be experienced by listening to Edward Said talk about his experience in Palestine when he was a boy.

With that stated, this article that I am writing here should not be interpreted as an attack on the Jewish state, for if the Jewish state is to survive over centuries if not millennia, people like Mr. Smotrich must be marginalized.

You’ll go much further in life with a lump of sugar than a switch.

To begin with, the Palestinian people did not rush into Palestine as the Philadelphia 76ers would do in meeting the Los Angeles Lakers at the Forum.

Ha ha.

The Palestinian people had been living in that area of the world for thousands of years.

The author, Edward Said, now deceased, can describe for you on YouTube how his family was dispossessed from Palestine.

He can illustrate for you the vibrant life that Palestinians enjoyed there.

So to say that the Palestinian people were never there, that they rushed in at the last moment when the state of Israel was contemplated, is a flat out lie.

It isn’t true.

The state of Israel was created so that the US and Great Britain could control the oil and gas assets in that region.

Israel is a beachhead.  The Jews were used to colonize the area.

How do we know this? We know this because nobody did anything for the Jews for 1900 years.  It was only after the discovery of oil in the area, and the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869, that the powers that be started looking out for the welfare of Jews.  Hmm, do you think there might be a connection?

It is most important for real Jews to understand that because when the day comes that oil and gas are not as necessary, when the day comes that the Suez Canal is not as necessary, the money people will abandon the Jews.

Yes, they will do it, both fake Jews and fake Christians alike.

The money people have no allegiance to anything at all except money. And they were the ones who created Israel.

The modern state of Israel would not exist without “the money” – the bigs.

To move hundreds of thousands of people into Israel requires organization and materiel. And that costs money.

Yes, the pennies and nickels that Jews gave in their congregations helped, but that only came about because “the money” made the decision to develop a beachhead in the Middle East.

That’s reality.

Regular people are too disorganized and too opposed to each other in order to marshal a mass movement like that.

As long as oil and gas are necessary, Israel’s security is assured. Nothing is going to happen to them. And they’re absolutely, unequivocally will never be a Palestinian state.

I don’t care what kind of noble BS comes out of our leaders.

There will be no Palestinian state as long as oil and gas and the Suez Canal are necessary.

In that respect Mr. Smotrich need not worry.

***

And as far as Iran is concerned – they don’t want the Palestinian state either.

The current enmity between Iran and Israel is BS.

It’s a gentleman’s agreement amongst the corrupt leaders of both countries.

As I have stated before you as a Jew have more in common with a regular person from Iran than either of you have with your respective leaders.

Iran’s leaders have no interest in seeing an independent Palestinian state. Why would they want that? If they have that their main  issue would go away.  They need an occupied Palestinian people to justify their military buildup to their people.

Israel and the United States are the Great Satans. The leaders of Iran need them.

And our leaders need Iran as an enemy.

You see, leaders all over the world are a fucked up type of people.

They are sick pups – all of them.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley

Copyright 2023 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Your Supreme Court Circa 1950

Here is a spreadsheet of Supreme Court Justices circa 1950. Make your own conclusions. As you can see there was a healthy representation of regular people coming from regular schools on the Supreme Court. That representation does not exist today because Harvard University and its puppets in the New Ivy League have hijacked our nation. Our Supreme Court is now populated by Harvard-Yale -Ivy league cocksuckers who can’t punch their way out of a paper bag, who can’t sell hot chocolate to an Eskimo. They can’t because they won’t. And they won’t because they have been indoctrinated into the power structure known as the Harvard Cartel. They are corporate puppets – signed, sealed and delivered.

Is there a cause and effect between the composition of the Supreme Court and the disintegration of our country in the past seventy years. You bet your ass there is.

Fuck you, Harvard.

Now, this is the way it works. The people who now get on the Supreme Court are blackmailed if they can be. There’s a reason for bringing up all these sexual peccadillos and other misdeeds during the hearings: to get the candidate to lie under oath. That way, when the power structure needs a critical vote in the future, the justice can be blackmailed into voting the approved way.

When it comes to the Kavanaugh hearings, my guess is that the power structure already has the photographic evidence to show that he was engaging in the kinds of activities he was accused of engaging in. The power structure can bring that forward anytime they wish should Kavanaugh not comply.

Now, does such evidence disqualify Kavanaugh from being on the Supreme Court? Absolutely not. People do stupid things when they’re young. Does lying under oath disqualify Kavanaugh from being on the Supreme Court? Absolutely.

So then if anyone can be blackmailed, why select only Harvard-Yale and other New Ivy League jerk-offs? Because you want people who are throughly indoctrinated into the corporate-elitist culture that you are imposing upon society. You don’t want to blackmail people unless you absolutely need to. Having people from a similar elitist mindset makes your job easier.

Copyright 2023 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

We Know the Truth – Maybe

How many of you are thinking right now that this case against Brian Kohberger, the alleged murderer of the four Idaho students, is incomplete?

There are a lot of questions to be asked.

Putting aside DNA evidence for the time being, why would Kohberger target these four Idaho students?

In the seven weeks since the murder, not one person has come forward to state that Kohberger knew any of these four students.

So how did he meet them?

How would he know where they lived?

How does he know anything about the house?

For all he knew a burly cop with a gun might have lived in that house.

So how does he develop the guts to go into that house not knowing that a person with a gun might be living there?

He could have known that if he had been in that house numerous times.

Yet no one has come forward to put him in that house in anyway.

Isn’t that strange?

Maybe it was an inside job. Maybe Kohberger was a murderer for hire.

I am concerned with how this case was handled.

If the police suspected him when he was living in Pullman, why didn’t they bring him down to the station and ask him questions?

That’s the traditional way.

Many suspects incriminate themselves during the interview process.

Wouldn’t it have been better for them to bring him down to the station, ask him questions, get a DNA sample there, if he so agreed, and listen to his side of the story.

How many times have we seen suspects brought down to the station to be asked questions?

A lot of times.

Perhaps he has an alibi that is rocksolid.

My concern is that by not bringing him down to the station, by not giving him the opportunity to clear himself, the police fostered and encouraged a bias toward convicting him.

It almost seems as if they didn’t want to know that he could be potentially cleared.

Perhaps there was too much pressure upon the police to solve this case.

The white Hyundai ELANTRA is hardly evidence enough in itself.

The Hyundai ELANTRA is a very popular car. Looking at the production numbers there were easily 100,000 of these vehicles sold per year for the last 10 years

That makes approximately 1 million of these vehicles on the road in America.

Assuming that one and every five of these is white colored (White is a popular color. Just look on the road the next time you are driving.), that yields, given a population of 325 million, approximately one white ELANTRA for every 1625 people

Given that there are approximately 50,000 people between Pullman and Moscow, plus another 25,000 in the surrounding area, that would make for approximately 50 white ELANTRA’s.

Factor in that the ELANTRA is a car more likely to be owned by college students, and you can estimate that they’re probably 60 to 70 white ELANTRA’s in the area.

So, having a white ELANTRA is hardly enough to convict Kohberger.

Let’s not also forget that the police were looking for an ELANTRA of model year between 2011 and 2013

Kohberger’s white ELANTRA is a 2015 model.

As far as the cell phone records are concerned, a cell phone tower usually handles a radius of a mile or two before handing off to another cell tower.

Even though Kohberger’s cell was found around where the four students lived, there are a lot of eating and shopping establishments within that radius

Now, to the DNA evidence. From what we know so far, they did not have prior to the arrest a direct sample of DNA from Brian Kohberger.

They used genetic genealogy to arrive at Brian Kohberger as a suspect. Well, genetic genealogy is not foolproof. Wrong accusations have been made in the past.

The DNA they retrieved came from the sheath of the knife that allegedly was used to kill the four Idaho students. It was left behind.

What!

Why would such a careful killer leave behind the sheath of a knife. And if he did, why would one of the students on the bottom floor not see him carrying a knife on his way out the door?

And why would this student having viewed the perpetrator, allegedly Kohberger, at around 4:30 in the morning, not call the police right away?

If you’re that scared, why would you not call?

Does anybody think this is strange?

It is strange.

In the field of medicine, we build a diagnosis from the bottom up. We take a history first, then we do a physical exam. Then we order tests after that.

The test results generally should fall within the context of the history and physical. If they do not, then we begin to question the validity of the tests.

The same should apply to the investigation of a murder.

This is why law-enforcement is encouraged to build a case from the bottom up, the traditional way.

This does not seem to be done in this case.

From my perspective it appears that the police relied too heavily on the DNA evidence and built this case from the top down.

This is not to say that Kohberger didn’t do it.

But maybe he was a murderer for hire. Maybe there are other people involved. Maybe

How many of you are thinking right now that this case against Brian Kohberger, the alleged murder of the four Idaho students, is incomplete?

There are a lot of questions to be asked.

Putting aside DNA evidence for the time being, why would Kohberger target these four Idaho students?

In the seven weeks since the murder, not one person has come forward to state that Kohberger knew any of these four students.

So how did he meet them?

How would he know where they lived?

How does he know anything about the house?

For all he knew a burly cop with a gun might have lived in that house.

So how does he develop the guts to go into that house not knowing that a person with a gun might be living there?

He could have known that if he had been in that house numerous times.

Yet no one has come forward to put him in that house in anyway.

Isn’t that strange?

Maybe it was an inside job. Maybe Kohberger was a murder for hire.

I am concerned with how this case was handled.

If the police suspected him when he was living in Pullman, why didn’t they bring him down to the station and ask him questions?

That’s the traditional way.

Many suspects incriminate themselves during the interview process.

Wouldn’t it have been better for them to bring him down to the station, ask him questions, get a DNA sample there, if he so agreed, and listen to his side of the story.

How many times have we seen suspects brought down to the station to be asked questions?

A lot of times.

Perhaps he has an alibi that is rocksolid.

My concern is that by not bringing him down to the station, by not giving him the opportunity to clear himself, the police fostered and encouraged a bias toward convicting him.

It almost seems as if they didn’t want to know that he could be potentially cleared.

Perhaps there was too much pressure upon them to solve this case.

The white Hyundai ELANTRA is hardly evidence enough in itself.

The Hyundai ELANTRA is a very popular car. Looking at the production numbers there were easily 100,000 of these vehicles sold per year for the last 10 years

That makes approximately 1 million of these vehicles on the road.

Assuming that one and every five of these is white colored (White is a popular color. Just look on the road the next time you are driving.), that makes approximately, given a population of 325 million, approximately one white ELANTRA for every 1625 people

Given that there are approximately 50,000 people between Pullman and Moscow, plus another 25,000 in the surrounding area, that would make for approximately 50 white ELANTRA’s.

Factor in that the ELANTRA is a car more likely to be owned by college students, and you can estimate that they’re probably 60 to 70 white ELANTRA’s in the area.

So, having a white ELANTRA is hardly enough to convict Kohberger.

Let’s not also forget that the police were looking for an ELANTRA of model year between 2011 and 2013

Kohberger’s white ELANTRA is a 2015 model.

As far as the cell phone records are concerned, a cell phone tower usually handles a radius of a mile or two before handing off to another cell tower.

Even though Kohberger’s cell was found around where the four students lived, there are a lot of other eating, and shopping establishments within that radius

Now, to the DNA evidence. From what we know so far, they did not have prior to the arrest a direct sample of DNA from Brian Kohberger.

They used genetic genealogy to arrive at Brian Kohberger. Well, genetic genealogy is not foolproof. Wrong accusations have been made in the past.

The DNA they retrieved came from the sheath of the knife that allegedly was used to kill the four Idaho students.

What!

Why would such a careful killer leave behind the sheath of a knife. And if he did, why would one of the students on the bottom floor not see him carrying a knife on his way out the door?

And why would this student having viewed the perpetrator, allegedly Kohberger, at around 4:30 in the morning, not call the police right away?

If you’re that scared, why would you not call?

Does anybody think this is strange?

It is strange.

In the field of medicine, we build a diagnosis from the bottom up. We take a history first, then we do a physical exam. Then we ordered tests after that.

The test results generally should fall within the context of the history and physical. If they do not, then we begin to question the validity of the tests.

The same should apply to investigation of a murder.

This is why law-enforcement is encouraged to build a case from the bottom up, the traditional way.

This does not seem to be done in this case.

From my perspective now it appears that the police relied too heavily on the DNA evidence and build the case from the top down.

This is not to say that Kohberger didn’t do it.

But maybe he was a murderer for hire. Maybe there are other people involved. Maybe Kohberger knew people who had it in for the four Idaho students.

A better way to solve this case might be to compare all the people who own a white ELANTRA in the area with all the people who knew or who came in contact with the four Idaho students. Then compare those lists with all the people who had contact with Kohberger.

It might be fruitful.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley

Copyright 2023 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

The Sham

Hey, look everybody, Bill Clinton’s coming to town. Let’s turn off our brains and participate in the sham.

One of the neatest tricks in politics occurs when former Presidents get out there on the stump for candidates currently running for political office.

Bill Clinton is coming to a town near me.

Barack Obama may be coming to a town near you.

It’s not just Democrats though; Republicans will play the same game.

So, when you see these politicians getting out there, it’s only natural for you to believe that the elections are real and that the elections matter.

Otherwise, if the whole game was rigged, why would they be out there?

I’ll give you a couple of reasons.

Number one, they have to continue the sham that your vote matters. If the sham is exposed as a sham, they would have to change the system. This they do not want to do. They are making too much money by it.

Number two, they don’t give a damn about your vote; they only care that their faction of the corporate gang gets to divvy up the perks.

What they’re saying is this: If our party wins, we get 2/3 of the perks. If the other party wins we only get 1/3.

Either way you the American people lose.

The government always gets in power.

It’s a gentleman’s agreement between the two parties.

Democracy is a sham.

It only exists to give you the illusion that you have a choice.

Unfortunately, you don’t have any choice at all because they’re both going to rip off the system, promote war as an economic model, and continue exploitation of workers abroad.

Hello, suckers!

You know this to be true in your guts.

You are in denial.

You are furiously pumping yourself up with slogans.

Consequently, there is this force that draws you to vote.

It is an inexorable force.

You say to your self: If I don’t vote, I can’t complain, and I can’t have any opportunity to change things.

Here’s a ticket on the clue train: You can complain, and even if you do vote, you won’t change things.

There are other ways to change the world.

Don’t get suckered into thinking that the only way is through politics.

You can change yourself by having a measure of self-respect.

Stop disrespecting yourself by participating in a sham.

Actually the elections have been shams since the day democracy was invented.

Over 200 years ago Napoleon and his brothers rigged plebiscites in France. Naturally they would win. They were so brazen they would rig the votes with even numbers. So Napoleon would win the elections by 16,000,000 to 4,000,000.

Talk about comedy!

The comedic act continued its roadshow into the United States during the last election of Joe Biden.

No serious person could possibly believe that a man sitting in his bunker, a man who had not energized his base, could possibly win.

I can tell you a stone cold fact. The success, as defined by turnout, of every party that I have hosted at my house or office has been directly correlated to the amount of energy that I put into promoting the party.

When you promote yourself, you have a greater chance of success. When you don’t promote yourself, you lessen your chance of success.

Joe Biden energized nobody in the 2020 election. He was not out there on the stump to any significant degree. His opponent, Donald Trump, no matter how much you detest him (and I do), did go out on the stump, and he did energize his base.

And yet, we are told that Joe Biden won the election.

That does not comport with reality or anything in my own experience.

The purpose of this letter is not to justify the illegitimacy of the 2020 election. The purpose of this letter is to demonstrate that democracy is a sham.

The elites figured out a long time ago how to rig the elections.

As Mark Twain stated over a century ago: If voting mattered they’d never let us do it.

Elections don’t matter, and they don’t care.

You won’t change a damn thing by voting.

The politicians didn’t go into politics to do what you want; they went into politics to do what they want.

They don’t see themselves as servants of the people; they see themselves as rulers of the people.

I don’t care what the Constitution says. I don’t care about the way it’s supposed to be.

That’s not cynicism; that’s hard earned reality.

Now, there’s an argument to be made that at least voting gives you the opportunity to change things.

That would be true only as long as the political class cared about you.

But when the political class has been hijacked by a Harvard Cabal that considers its own interests and its own immortality first, a place where noblesse oblige does not exist, that representation is not possible.

And that is the state of affairs in the United States today.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley

Copyright 2022 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Who We Are

Follow this through.

As I may have stated before, my father died when I was 13 years of age. That produced a significant amount of trauma in our family’s life.

I was not immune to that trauma.

If that was the only trauma that I had suffered, I might’ve had a chance at a normal life.

I might have been able to get married and have kids.

The Lord took me in a different direction.

My mother remarried when I was 15 years of age, and that remarriage doubled the amount of trauma to my developing psychosexual identity.

Suddenly I inherited a stepfather and two step brothers, and we lived under the same roof.

It’s a strange thing to combine two families together.

It’s a tremendous adjustment, more so if you are in early to mid adolescence.

I know the transition was difficult on my older stepbrother Stevie, who turned to drugs.

It was tough for me even though I stayed away from drugs.

Combining two families is stressful. It’s nothing like you see on television.

Television portrays the combination of two families as a joyful, non-stressful event that the children are willing and gleeful to engage in.

Perhaps this is true for many families, but I suspect that for the majority of families the children are not desirous of their parent’s remarriage.

This is a true story.

Our combined families minus the parents were sitting around in our recreation room watching an episode of My Three Sons.

In this particular episode Steve Douglas, played by Fred McMurray, along with his soon to be bride named Barbara approach the children from both families in their living room and announce that they are getting married.

The children upon hearing the news immediately rise up in vigorous happiness and congratulate their parents.

When our real combined families saw this scene, there was a moment of silence before we all burst out in laughter.

It was obvious that none of the children from our combined family wanted our parents to get married.

There’s a reason for this.

In the developing child there are two forces, one from the father, and one from the mother, that are attempting to integrate with each other into a unique personality that is you.

The child desperately wants to integrate these forces into a nice tight integrated dovetailed joint.

Divorce and death weaken this joint. What you get is a weak unstable joint and, consequently, a weak unstable personality – one that is more fractured.

The older you are in adolescence, the stronger this joint is should the parents divorce, or should one parent die.

The earlier you are in adolescence, the weaker this joint becomes.

This is why trauma in the family affects younger adolescents more than it does older adolescents.

When this trauma hits, the child will do anything to preserve and strengthen this joint.

They definitely do not want their parents to remarry. That is a television fantasy.

In my case, this double hit from both my father’s death and my mother’s remarriage cause me to become more angry and introverted.

I lost all the socialization that normally takes place during high school years.

I participated in almost no activities. Sure, there were a few, but only a few.

There was an entire world of student parties and socialization that I was oblivious to.

It’s difficult to remember back on fifty years with extreme clarity, but I remember going through a decision process in my mind with regard to survival and direction in my life.

Somewhere in my subconscious I made a childlike decision, because I was a child, that close relationships could result in extreme pain should one of those relations die.

It would therefore cause me less pain emotionally if I was not closely attached to other people.

This is logical, but it is not normal logic. It’s aberrant because most people don’t think this way.

Nevertheless I was a child.

It therefore became logical to my childlike mind that if I never had any girlfriends, or by extension a wife, I could not have children. If I did not have a wife or children, they could not die on me. Therefore I would experience less pain.

Thus my child-like mind embraced this logic, and there grew within me a force that would automatically prevent me from interacting normally with the opposite sex even though I had a biological desire to do so.

I remember experiencing this force in high school. There was this girl that I liked and wanted to ask out, but I could feel this force within me preventing me from doing so.

This force has persisted throughout my life.

It feels at times as if I am missing a set of instructions, or if there is a blockage on a set of instructions within me.

It causes me to act awkwardly when I try to engage the opposite sex in a sexual way.

It is not a force that I can defeat.

It has become part of my integrated, aberrant personality.

This force is so strong that when I have tried to have sex with the opposite sex, my body shuts down.

It’s a protective mechanism gone awry.

I was able to obtain an erection by myself, but not with the opposite sex.

My body shuts down. There is nothing that I can do to control this.

This was frustrating to me when I was young, but now that I am older and understand what’s going on, I am not frustrated at all.

The mind of a child when undergoing stress in adolescence, when psychosexual identity is being forged, makes conclusions about life.

Those conclusions define who you are throughout your life. You cannot alter them.

I suspect that homosexuality, pedophilia, asexuality has its roots in the forging of psychosexual identity during adolescence.

People want to know why they are the way they are. I can only give you insight into the way that I am.

Jeffrey Dahmer wanted to know why he was the way he was.

Let’s put aside the notion that a hernia surgery caused by Jeffrey Dahmer to be the way he was. There is no evidence, nor will there ever be any evidence that a hernia surgery leads to this type of activity.

What we do know is that Jeffrey Dahmer‘s parents argued and fought constantly.

I suspect that the extreme trauma that he was undergoing during his early childhood and adolescence disrupted his integrating personality.

In an attempt to survive and stay alive, he made internal conclusions which became part of his personality. He reached out into his own experiences and used those experiences to form a psychosexual identity, unique to him, which permitted him to survive.

Of course these internal conclusions were flawed and aberrant. Of course these conclusions made and make no sense. He made these conclusions when he was a child.

Internally to him they made sense. To us they are flawed and aberrant.

He understood that his logic was aberrant to the rest of us, but to himself, the logic was valid.

In terms of his own body and psyche, his actions seemed right and valid. He understood that his actions were wrong in terms of the rest of society, but to his own self his actions were right, not wrong.

Similarly, in my case, my logic seems right to me in terms of my own survival. I understand that my logic is flawed in the broader context, but in terms of myself it is correct.

I bring this up to point out the flawed legal concept of knowing right from wrong.

Yes, Jeffrey Dahmer knew that you believed his actions were wrong, but in terms of himself, he believed his actions were right.

Much time is consumed in the legal system as to whether an individual who commits a crime knows right from wrong.

It’s a waste of time.

A person who commits a crime obviously feels within his own context that what he’s doing is right.

The only thing that counts in the legal system is what the majority of the people think.

In that sense, anybody who commits a crime, obviously has some psychological trait that is aberrant from the norm.

Why is this important?

It’s important because we then begin to realize that all crime and aberrancy has a psychological basis.

This realization then compels us to prevent this aberrancy to the highest degree possible.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

This realization also compels us to understand that much of aberrancy is not fixable.

You can’t fix me into being a normal functioning heterosexual unless you’re willing to send me to North Korea and have Kim Jong-un take me down to a baby and rebuild my personality, something you’re not willing to do.

You can’t fix a homosexual. They are who they are.

You can’t fix a pedophile. They are who they are.

You can’t fix Jeffrey Dahmer. He was who he was.

There is no rehabilitation possible. There is no conversion therapy that is going to work.

What you see is what you get.

What you can do, is prevent sexual aberrancy. What you can do is prevent aberrance of all types.

You can create a society where families are not stressed out economically. You can ensure an economy that works to provide more people more money.

You can create a more stable family structure. You can eliminate pornography as a force that affects children adversely.

You can delete society of mindless algorithms and standardized tests which place too much pressure upon adults and children.

You can treat stop treating people as numbers.

You can stop human resource departments from treating people as widgets.

Of course, you can’t prevent a parent who dies of a heart attack, but you can create a healthier society.

You can put high taxes on deep fried foods, and foods that contain high fructose corn syrup.

You can give monetary inducements to the Medicaid and Medicare populations for keeping their weight within certain limits.

You can put intelligent controls on all addictive drugs that would find the healthiest balance between the lowest addiction rates and the least amount of organized crime.

You can deemphasize gambling in the United States.

If we are going to have a service economy forever, we can mandate that workers in the service economy must make a living wage.

We can do a lot of things.

All of these public measures can impact the family and the developing child.

None of these measures can impact me and my particular psychosexual identity because I am old and because I am who I am.

But we may be able to prevent so many people from moving down aberrant pathways.

I will leave you with this analogy.

A developing psychosexual identity is akin to an offshore oil platform being built upon the sea.

As long as the sea is calm, the platform is fine. Everything is as it should be.

But what happens when an earthquake or rogue wave hits the platform.

The platform becomes destabilized.

The structures begin to waver up and down, and move from side to side.

The men on the platform become frightened and furiously move to stabilize the platform. They take whatever materials they have on hand and Gerry rig a solution.

The solution isn’t perfect; indeed, the solution is twisted and perhaps a little ugly.

But it works. It holds the platform together and enables the men to survive.

Well, this is what happens with a developing psychosexual identity that has been traumatized.

The only difference is that there’s no one to come around and rescue an individual.

The men on the platform can call for help, get on a boat and escape. Later the oil platform can be towed into port and rebuilt.

A human being can not.

What you see is what you get.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley

Copyright 2022 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

You Made Your Bed

Dear Harvard graduate,

It’s not my fault that you went to Harvard.

You did that on your own.

You became seduced.

You became seduced by greatness.

You didn’t even know that you were being seduced.

You didn’t know because the seduction began when you were a small child.

You were roped into believing in the greatness of men.

As were we all.

You were regaled by the media of the supposed greatness of people like FDR, Eisenhower, Churchhill, and so forth.

Of course, they weren’t great men. They were robbers of people’s potential. They were puppets of the empire, and their true goal was to gain money and wealth for the powerful elite.

They did not stand up for the common man. Indeed, they compromised the common man through war and foreign exploitation.

These are the people who are talked about.

You wanted to be one of those people, and because you are smart, it was only natural that you could be one of them too.

To achieve this end, our society conditioned you to believe in the greatness of Harvard University and its ability to mold great men.

This is how you became seduced.

You wanted to be one of the people who are talked about.

You made a deal with the devil.

To be fair, you didn’t know that you made a deal with the devil. You were only seventeen years at the time.

But you did.

You went to Harvard, and the grooming stepped up a notch.

You began to meet important people at Harvard. Famous actors stopped by at the Hasty Pudding Club.

Maybe Tom Cruise. Maybe Brad Pitt.

Prominent politicians gave guest lectures.

Your professors personally knew the so-called movers and shakers in society.

Perhaps, you were even invited to parties and soirées where royalty was present.

Hey look, there is Prince William.

Gradually, gradually, gradually the Harvard machine indoctrinated you.

They roped you into the cult.

When you got married, an announcement was made in the New York Times. Then when you had a baby, that announcement was made as well.

The Sulzberger clan (the publishers of the NYT) are part of the Harvard machine. They engage in deep propaganda, so deep that you don’t even know you’re being propagandized.

Your name in the New York Times! Just think of it!

Why, you must be important! Why, you must be better than other people! Why, you must be a demigod!

Why, why, why you must even be God’s representative on Earth!

That’s a heavy experience.

When you went to apply for a job, large corporations took notice. The big guys coveted you.

You were put on the fast track, and you didn’t even know it.

Of course, you were doing it yourself, you convinced yourself.

How could it have been any other way, you reasoned.

When you wanted to write a book, it was a piece of cake for you to get an agent and a hearing with a major publishing house.

That’s what the Harvard machine can do for you.

It’s not just a school; it’s a connection network.

It’s not my fault that this happened to you.

It is my problem though.

And it’s your problem as well.

It’s your problem because you think that because you went on to Harvard, that you are going to be invited into the true power structure of the United States and by extension the world.

But you’re not.

The true power structure is only going to give you a taste of power.

For that taste of power, they are going to use you in their money making rackets.

If you are a politician, they will humiliate you, then, if they decide to do so, toss you away into the wastebasket.

Have you heard of the Rothschilds?

They are a very wealthy family, and they have a lot of power in the world.

One branch of the family lives in the United Kingdom.

According to Evelyn de Rothschild, the Rothschilds are not part of British aristocracy. Their family is too new. They have only been in England for a few hundred years. There are families who have been there eight hundred years.

How about your family, Mr. And Ms. Harvard graduate?

You came from regular people, didn’t you?

Do you seriously think that American aristocracy is going to let you run the place?

Think again.

Think of all the Harvard Cabal graduates who have been thrown under the bus by the ruling elite.

Bill Clinton, Scooter Libby, Henry Cisneros, and more.

How about Alexander Acosta? He was the lawyer who was working on the Jeffrey Epstein case in Florida. He was the one who got Jeffrey Epstein off on a light sentence.

Alexander Acosta’s political career is over. He couldn’t win a race for dog catcher in a one-man town.

I’m sure he wanted to go far in politics.

He’s not going to go far. He’s another guy who joined the cabal thinking that he was going to be in the power structure.

They used him.

I’m sure the cabal will take care of him in some way, but, alas, his name is ruined.

Is that what you want, Mr. and Ms. Harvard graduate?

Well, sorry to tell you, it doesn’t matter what you want anymore. That’s what you signed up for.

By now, you have already received many of the perks that the cabal can offer, and one of these days the cabal may ask you for a favor.

Here is my advice to you: if you want to retain your privileges, if you want to keep your first class ticket on the jet, you damn well better do what they tell you to do.

If you don’t do what they tell you to do, you’re going to find out just how important that cabal was to your success.

And it won’t be pretty for you.

That’s the reality. That’s what you bought into.

That’s the way it works.

You made your bed, you sleep in it.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley

Copyright 2022 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Aaron Judge and Legacy

Soon Aaron Judge will break Roger Maris’s home run record for the Yankees.

Some are touting it as the real record for home runs in a season – 62.

They believe that Barry Bonds is not the true owner of the major league record for home runs in a season – 73 – because he was allegedly doing steroids.

They are wrong.

Barry Bonds is the legitimate owner of the major league record for home runs in a season on two levels.

First, the executives of Major League Baseball looked the other way during the steroid era. They knew that the players were doing steroids; they didn’t want to know that the players were doing steroids. They looked the other way because they liked the attendance records that the home runs were bringing in.

By looking the other way, by saying nothing, they gave approval to the use of steroids. By their silence they legitimized steroids. They can’t have their cake and eat it too.

The fathers of Major League Baseball would like you to forget their role in the steroid era. They denounce players like Barry Bonds, and they now try to walk away from him and the other steroid users.

They bar them from the Hall of Fame through their sycophantic baseball writers.

Sorry, it doesn’t work that way. They don’t get to do that.

By saying nothing about the steroids, they hopped in bed with Barry Bonds (and the others) and legitimized their use.

Secondly, there’s nothing wrong with steroids in professional sports. If we are going to allow players to improve their vision with contact lenses, then steroids are just as legitimate.

If we are going to allow players to get ACL repairs and UCL reconstructions, then steroids are just as legitimate.

One set of cells in the human body does not have special rights over another set of cells.

If I am a baseball player who has excellent vision but average muscle strength, why am I not allowed to pump up my muscles to the level of Mickey Mantle?

Why is a poor-sighted player with natural muscular strength allowed to improve his vision, but another player with perfect vision is not allowed to improve his muscles through steroids?

Why does one set of cells in the body have greater privileges than another?

If we’re going to dismiss Barry Bonds’s record, then we have to dismiss all of Mickey Mantle’s records. From what I’ve been able to read Mickey Mantle would get loaded and drunk the night before the game, then he would take uppers before the game began.

Well, my friend those uppers are performance enhancing drugs. For that reason we have to throw out all of Mickey Mantle’s records.

Mickey Mantle cheated.

Is that what you want me to say?

I didn’t think so.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley

Copyright 2022 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

A Letter to Michelle Obama

Dear Michelle,

Just yesterday I was watching a tape of you explaining to white people, I presume, that the reason we white people moved out to the suburbs was to get away from black people.

I will paraphrase. Try to imagine me doing an impression of you. That should be hysterical enough in itself.

“Y’ all were all trying to get away from us. We were doing all the things that we were supposed to do, and y’ all were moving away from us.“

I’d like to respond.

The white flight you are talking about occurred after World War II. This was when many young GIs were returning home from the war. It was also the time that major developers like William Levitt were building massive developments out in the suburbs.

These developments fit in nicely with the vamping up of the intrastate and interstate highway system which made it possible for people to drive their cars 25 miles away from an urban center.

Now here’s the kicker: Since most of us baby boomers were born after the war, we didn’t make any decision on going anywhere.

Being born in 1954, I didn’t have any choice of where my parents lived.

Given the parenting skills that existed in post World War II America, had I said anything, I would’ve been told to shut up.

I might also have been given a spanking.

Back in the 1950s and 60s, before permissive liberals ruined America, children didn’t dress up in black pajamas and lead their parents around with a machine gun.

Now, of course, we live in an era in which parents are completely dominated by their children.

Back in the day, parents told children what to do, where to go. And if you didn’t like it, tough darts.

Okay then, since we’ve established that baby boomers had almost zero choice and zero contribution when it came to white flight, let’s go back a generation and ask why the greatest generation engaged in white flight.

Were they racist?

Were they afraid of getting beat up by black people?

I doubt it.

The black community had not been thoroughly devastated yet. It would take Democrats running their welfare plantations three or four decades to accomplish that.

No, I think the greatest generation were afraid of another guy. I think that guy is why they left the inner-city if they ever lived there in the first place.

My dad grew up in the periphery of the Philadelphia area. Because his father was working for the railroad, he moved around a bit. For a time he lived in Wyncote. I know that he graduated from Cheltenham high school.

My mother grew up in Smyrna, Delaware which is a small town south of Philadelphia. There was no inner city there.

When they were young and poor my parents did live in West Philadelphia – 4244 Chestnut Street.

Between 1946 and 48, they lived in a one room apartment without a refrigerator. There was a private bath down the hall.

I don’t think they were afraid of people. I think people were afraid of them.

Soon after, my dad took a job at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. That’s where I was born.

When I was four years old, hardly in a position to make decisions for my family, we moved to the suburbs in Philadelphia. I grew up in Warminster.

Why did my parents move there? Was it to get away from you, Michelle?

I don’t think so. If they were trying to get away from anyone, they were probably trying to get away from Jimmy Markum.

Have you seen the movie Mystic River?

It’s a wonderful movie, and all the actors are marvelous.

In the movie Sean Penn plays Jimmy Markum.

Jimmy Markum is a tough guy who will kill people when he needs to. He plays a scary guy who sports what appears to be a prison tattoo on his back.

Laura Linney plays his lowlife, white trash wife who will readily support the evil shit that Jimmy does.

Jimmy Markum is a bad guy.

That’s probably who my parents were moving away from. In those days white people didn’t have to worry about black folk. They had enough on their hands with other white people.

Now, where we moved, there were a few black families around. I don’t remember my parents ever making a disparaging remark about black people.

One of my friends in grade school was a black boy named Dave. I didn’t have anything against him. I wasn’t raised to hate black folk.

In spite of all that, racial epithets were used freely in that era. I wasn’t immune from using them. Like all regular people, I used them. I’m not like the phony broadcasters and politicians who you hang out with, Michelle, the fakes who claim that they never uttered a racial slur, never smoked a joint, and never told a lie.

One time when we boys were playing cards I slipped and used the word nigger. I was trying to choose who would deal, and I said out loud: “Eeny meeny miny moe, catch a nigger by the toe.” I forgot that Dave was standing next to me. After I said that I looked at him, and he gave me this evil grin. Then he chased me around the room.

We were only twelve or thirteen, so I’m pretty sure we made up after that. Kids aren’t fundamentally racist.

And, unlike you and your friends, especially after you get your brains reverse-engineered by Harvard University, kids instinctively know that there’s a difference between barring someone from participating in an activity and calling someone a name.

It’s true that there was one or two people in our neighborhood who were afraid of black folk. I remember my sister telling me that her friend’s father said that he was going to sell his house if a black family moved in.

So I agree that there was a lot of fear going on. I agree that there was a lot of discrimination going on – even from William Levitt who would not allow blacks to live in his developments.

A side story to William Levitt is that he wouldn’t let Jews live in his developments either, and William Levitt was Jewish.

What do you make of that?

I think the people of the greatest generation had been programmed to believe that it was better to keep ethnic, racial and religious groups separate. I think they felt that many problems could be prevented by separating different groups. They probably felt that different sub-cultures when mixed would create more conflict and violence.

I don’t think it was overt hatred that motivated them.

I also don’t think that racial hatred motivated white people to move to the suburbs.

I think it was a combination of new areas opening up, the emergence of the automobile as a force in America to give people mobility, the creation of suburbs by people like William Levitt (yes, there is a Levitown in the Philadelphia area), and of course Jimmy Markum.

Don’t underestimate the power of Jimmy Markum. People don’t want to live around people who behave badly.

I think it’s too easy to say that white people were moving away from black people.

By the way, Michelle, why aren’t you living with the black gente who your husband represented all those years?

Why did you and Barack move to a white area on Martha’s Vineyard?

Didn’t you engage in what you accuse us of doing?

Sure you did.

You wanted to move away from Jimmy Markum.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley

Copyright 2022 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved