Several readers have asked me to comment on what the Empire State Building is doing: The people in charge are lighting up the building red and yellow, in honor of Communist China. The PRC is marking its 60th anniversary. This regime, of course, is responsible for the physical destruction of tens of millions of people. This is a country with a gulag, called laogai. It is a country that deprives people of rights that we in the Free World take for granted. It is a country against which very, very credible charges of organ harvesting have been made. Etc.

I thought of calling up some friends of mine in the Chinese democracy movement, to see what they think of what the Empire State Building is doing. I decided not to: I know what they think. And this sort of thing simply torments them. It is disgusting. And, to them, bewildering: Why would people in a free country honor a police state?

I remember a talk I had with the Diaz-Balart brothers, several years ago. They are Cuban-American congressmen from Miami. They were saying that it would be one thing if free people were merely indifferent to Cuba and its suffering under a totalitarian dictatorship. That would not be very admirable or nice, but . . . you could live with it. But why do so many free people boost, defend, and celebrate that dictatorship? That is what really, nastily rankles.

Incidentally, the Empire State Building is a few blocks from where I now write. What a sickening thing they have done. I should say more, I know, but that’s all I can muster for now.

‐How about what Germany is doing — or some Germans? Frankfurt has a book fair, and Communist China is the guest of honor. That is, the country, the regime, is the guest of honor. And the Germans are disinviting dissident types, so that the Chinese Communists feel no discomfort. You sometimes wonder whether free people deserve the freedom they have, seeing as they treat the freedom of others so casually. And why should the PRC be honored at a Western book fair? Why would book-fair people honor a country where you can’t write and publish freely?

Is this not self-evidently bizarre?

‐You marvel at the ability of the world’s worst rulers to find one another and succor one another. Sometimes they are at odds, of course: as Stalin and Hitler were at odds, when the latter broke his pact with the former; as Saddam Hussein was at odds with the Iranian mullahs. But often they are shoulder to shoulder. I think of Chávez’s love of Ahmadinejad. And also his love of Quaddafi.

They were in Venezuela together, after their performances at the United Nations. They signed a declaration saying that they “reject intentions to link the legitimate struggle of the people for liberty and self-determination” with terrorism. In other words, they’re for terrorism.

Chávez gave Quaddafi a gold-plated replica of a sword once belonging to Simón Bolívar. And he said, “I’m not exaggerating at all. What Simón Bolívar is for the Venezuelan people, Moammar Quaddafi is for the Libyan people. He’s the liberator of Libya.”

Liberator of Libya from what? Sanity? Decency? What Libya needs is a liberator now.

Quaddafi, an absolute dictator, has been in power since 1969. That is a cool 40 years (though ten fewer than Castro). I wonder whether Chávez will try for such longevity. And will the Empire State Building light it up for them — Chávez, Quaddafi? How about the Castros?

How about the Kims?

‐In the last few weeks, we have had lessons in: Nothing is ever completely settled; you constantly have to make a case; you must take nothing for granted; you have to teach and reteach, even the most fundamental things. Let me tell you what I mean.

Prime Minister Netanyahu gave a magnificent speech before the U.N. But what a shame he had to say, in 2009, “Yes, the Holocaust occurred — here are some documents that relate to this occurrence.” How wearisome — how horrifying — that the leader of the Jewish state has to go before the world and say, “Contrary to what some of your speakers allege, yes, the Holocaust occurred.”

In Britain, they had a debate about the worth of Churchill — whether he was any good for Britain, for the world, for freedom, for life. Andrew Roberts et al. had to say yes. Patrick Buchanan et al. said no.

And so on. Yes, these exercises, these battles, are wearisome — and they remind you that you can take nothing for granted. Bill Buckley once quoted an aphorism: “The purpose of an open mind is to close it on some subjects.” Someone on a college campus once said to him proudly, defiantly, “We have no planted axioms here.” Bill said, “Oh? Not even the superiority of democracy over Nazism?”

I find, more and more, as I go along, that no question is really, truly settled in the world, even when it should be.

ADDENDUM: I was just proofreading this column — yes, I do that sometimes — and realize that the above item can be construed as equating an anti-Churchill position with Holocaust denial. That is not intended.

‐Prime Minister Gordon Brown is in deep trouble with his electorate — he is way down in the polls. So what does he do? It was interesting to note, he goes all Frank Rizzo. I quote from the Associated Press: “Brown lashed out against youth crime in a keynote speech Tuesday at his Labour Party’s conference that he hopes can spark a revival of his foundering fortunes.” The conference slogan is “Operation Fightback.” And here is a taste of Brown’s speech:

“We will not stand by and see the lives of the lawful majority disrupted by the behavior of the lawless minority. Because the decent, hardworking majority are getting ever more angry — rightly so — with the minority who will talk about their rights, but never accept their responsibilities.”

Geezum. Go ’head, Gordon! Britain could use a little Frank Rizzo, or a lot, frankly.

‐Have you acquainted yourself with our First Lady, and her views on motherhood, wifehood, and womanhood? You can find at least some of those views in this AP article. The article begins, “Michelle Obama says women should do what makes them happy, a lesson she says she learned after realizing her two children, her husband and her physical health feed off of her good moods.”

Okay. And “Mrs. Obama says she learned ‘what not to do’ from her mother, Marian Robinson, who now lives at the White House.” Here is Mrs. O.: “She’d say being a good mother isn’t all about sacrificing. It’s really investing and putting yourself higher on your priority list.”

More Mrs. O.: “Throughout my life, I’ve learned to make choices that make me happy and make sense for me. Even my husband is happier when I’m happy. So I have freed myself to put me on the priority list and say, yes, I can make choices that make me happy, and it will ripple and benefit my kids, my husband and my physical health. That’s hard for women to own. We’re not taught to do that. It’s a lesson that I want to teach my girls.”

We’re learning more and more about the Obamas, as their tenure lengthens. Would it be okay if I said that they don’t appear to have a heckuva lot of trouble looking out for No. 1? That there is not exactly a crisis of self-esteem? A danger of excessive self-sacrifice? A danger that they will be too far down on their own “priority lists”?

There is a line, of course, between decent and necessary self-regard and selfishness. Staying on the happy side of that line, I suppose, is a trick of life.

P.S. to the letter-writing public: Yes, I am very well acquainted with the adage “If mama ain’t happy, ain’t nobody happy.” Drank it with my mother’s milk!

‐Okay, I’m at a newsstand yesterday, and I see the new New York magazine. It has a portrait of Obama, with a bunch of epithets written into his face, and it says “HATE.” The point of the cover is that this poor president is the target of widespread and oppressive hatred. I couldn’t help thinking, “Have they no shame? Have they no sense of irony? Did they live here from January 2001 to January 2009? The hatred directed at our current president is practically a kiss compared with the hatred of those long, nasty, toxic years.”

I had a piece about exactly this two National Reviews ago. I will not fulminate on . . .

‐A little something on the school year: An AP article began, “Students beware: The summer vacation you just enjoyed could be sharply curtailed if President Barack Obama gets his way. Obama says American kids spend too little time in school, putting them at a disadvantage with other students around the globe.”

I had a memory. Years ago, I was watching The McLaughlin Group, which I so loved to do. This was at a time when we were all fearing Japan: They were outpacing us, they were going to own us, they were going to bury us, etc. Remember that? Sages like Tom Friedman liked to tell a joke: “The United States and the Soviet Union fought a Cold War, and who won in the end? Japan.” Ha ha ha. If you wanted to sound really smart, you told that joke.

Anyway, this issue of the school year came up at that time — we were going to have to study longer to keep up with the Japanese. And Jack Germond said, “I think kids ought to have some fun. I think they ought to go out and play. I think they ought to have a summer.”

I don’t hate education, believe me — but I agree. Totally. And, with the rise of the over-organized kid, the fine art of just hanging around and doing nothing — kicking a stone or whatever — seems to have been lost. Too bad.

I’m sure it’s the bias of my upbringing, but I think school ought to be from about September 6 to about June 6 — and that anything else is perverse.

‐A little language? I love old-school American English, as regular readers know, and I love what Coach Joe Paterno said recently after his Nittany Lions lost: “It was a team loss. No one person, or one play, lost it. We got licked.”

‐A reader wrote, “Thank you for giving me a laugh — I had not heard that term for years! Frankly, I didn’t know anyone still used it.” The reader was talking about “bit it” — as in “bit the dust,” “bought the farm.” Expired.

That expression is now old-school? Time flies . . .

‐Care for a name? This is an astonishing, wonderful one. Reader writes,

Dear Mr. Nordlinger,
I saw your Impromptus plug for the Goldwater Institute gala next month. I can’t be there, but it brought to mind this proposed addition to your inventory of great names. There is in internist in Laredo, Texas, named Dr. Adonis Zuniga-Goldwater. The hyphen makes it, no?

Yes, and the “Adonis” and everything else. An all-time beauty!

‐Meant to share with you, a few weeks back, something my colleague Fred Schwarz sent me. He knows I get a kick out of Chief Justice Roberts — his quips and so on (as well as his constitutional reasoning). Fred said, “This will make you appreciate the Chief Justice all the more: He is speaking this weekend at ceremonies to mark the 150th anniversary of the University of Michigan Law School. His only compensation: tickets to the Michigan-Notre Dame football game.”

Quite nice.

‐Finally, I had something in a recent column about Jesus and carpentry. A longtime, wise-and-witty reader wrote,

Jay,
Do you remember the environmentalist’s question, “What would Jesus drive?” And do you remember the conservative reply? “Like any carpenter, a full-sized American pickup truck, long bed, trailer hitch, locking toolbox (he hung out with thieves), crew cab, with the gunrack modified for fishing rods.”

That letter is from Georgia, by the way, which somehow makes it all the nicer — ain’t talkin’ (ex-) Soviet Georgia, either.

See you!

#JAYBOOK#