The Pitfalls of Multiculturalism

Columnist Mark Steyn recently offered up a wonderful story that encapsulates all that is wrong with multiculturalism:

In a more culturally confident age, the British in India were faced with the practice of "suttee" - the tradition of burning widows on the funeral pyres of their husbands. Gen. Sir Charles Napier was impeccably multicultural:

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: When men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks, and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."

Now that's my kind of multiculturalism.

News Media Fares Worse Than It Should

I know that I should be accustomed to news media misuse of statistics by now. But somehow that doesn't help.

"Charter schools fare worse than traditional", reads today's page 5A Birmingham News headline on an Associated Press story about a recently released study comparing charter schools to traditional public schools. Here's the lead paragraph in its entirety: "Fourth-graders in traditional public schools are doing better in both reading and math than students in charter schools, the government says in a report fueling fresh debate over school choice."

You would think the AP reporter would be a little more careful about disguising his agenda. The shame of it is that there is nothing wrong with writing a news story on this report, and it could have been done in a useful way. Instead, it's been hijacked and turned into propaganda.

First and foremost, nowhere in the article does the study explain whether the study compared charter schools to the specific traditional schools they were intended to replace. Surely the proper test for whether a charter school is worthwhile is whether the charter school is doing a better job than the traditional public school its students would be attending if it weren't for the charter school. In other words, it's simply not meaningful to compare a charter school's performance with some kind of national average performance for traditional public school, at least not for the purpose of determining whether or not the charter schools are a good use of public resources. But as the study comparies 150 charter schools to 6,764 public schools, it appears that this may not have been the purpose of the study. But that's the way the AP presented it.

Second, the lead paragraph says this study fuels "fresh debate over school choice". I suppose charter schools are a part of the school choice movement, but they are a small and unique part. School choice is about the money following the student to the student's choice of school, be it public or private. Even if this study proved what the AP wants it to, it says nothing about the merits of using public money to send students to non-charter private schools, or even about giving students free choice among those "traditional public schools" the AP is so excited about.

Finally, as anyone with a basic knowledge of charter schools knows, charter schools vary widely in philosophy, quality, track record, experience, etc. There are some terrific charter schools in the United States; there are also some terrible ones. The whole idea of a charter school is to use public money but not impose any particular standards. Free money; no rules (to speak of, anyway). (It's a mark of how bad public schools had become that an idea like this got off the ground in the first place. Imagine the government contracting for almost any other function on this basis!) The point is that it's not very helpful to look at average performance of all charter schools; surely the more relevant data would be the performance of the more successful charter schools. Those would be the ones with ideas worth imitating.

A carefully written story would have made it clear that charter schools as a whole, so far at least, don't appear to be raising students' performance to the "national average" of traditional public school performance. This does raise questions about whether "no standards at all" is really appropriate for charter schools, which are after all funded by taxpayers. But it doesn't say much of anything about whether "charter schools" are "worse" than "traditional public schools", as the headline and story lead imply.

Who Owns Britain?

Reported in a few places is the statement of one Anjem Choudary, a 39-year-old former leader of Al Mujahiroun, a defunct London-based Islamic group that clamored loudly for jihad. Interviewed by the BBC after making public calls for sharia for Britain, refusing to condemn the London subway bombers, and saying that Muslims shouldn't help police fight terrorism waged in the name of jihad, Mr. Choudary gave this informative response when asked why he didn't just move to a country that already has sharia, like Iran:

Who says you own Britain, anyway? Britain belongs to Allah. The whole world belongs to Allah. ... If I go to the jungle, I'm not going to live like the animals, I'm going to propagate a superior way of life. Islam is a superior way of life.

Choudary made the news again recently when he was convicted of sponsoring a nasty protest demonstration against the Danish embassy in London over those anti-Muhammad cartoons that led to such troubles all over the world. Seems he didn't get the proper permits and must pay a $1,400 fine, which is about half a month's government benefits for Mr. Choudary.

Worrisome business; decline of the West and all that. But I will do Mr. Choudary the undeserved courtesy of taking his question seriously. The BBC's obvious assumption in asking the question was that Britain properly belongs to the British -- or at least to the majority of the people who live in Britain who don't really want to sign up for sharia just yet. And, in a sense, that Iran belongs to sharia-loving Iranians. But Mr. Choudary disagrees, preferring instead his view that it's all Allah's. As for those who disagree, we can look at the signs present at Mr. Choudary's protest: "Behead Those Who Insult Islam"/"Slay Those Who Insult Islam,"/"Kill Those Who Insult Islam,"/"Butcher Those Who Mock Islam." You get the idea.

So who's right, the BBC or Mr. Choudary? Neither, of course. "The Earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof; the world and they that dwell therein," says the Psalmist, and the Bible sets us (including Mr. Choudary) up as the Earth's caretakers. Now the BBC might say I'm no better than Mr. Choudary, and that I am just substituting one primitive god for another and will lead us all to death for wanting to fight about labels and superstition. But there's an important difference between the Lord and Mr. Choudary's god. Mr. Choudary's god wants our heads; our God wants Mr. Choudary's heart. "Behead those who insult Islam," says Mr. Choudary's god. "Love your enemies, and do good to those who persecute you," says ours.

Single-stick, Sparring, Hammer-and-anvil, and Head-Bumping: A Fun Goodbye to White-Jacket

What to do on shipboard when you're off duty and tired of reading? The men of the Neversink had their choice among single-stick, sparring, hammer-and-anvil, and head-bumping:

All these were under the direct patronage of the Captain, otherwise -- seeing the consequences they sometimes led to -- they would undoubtedly have been strictly prohibited. It is a curious coincidence, that when a navy captain does not happen to be an admirer of the Fistiana, his crew seldom amuse themselves in that way.

Single-stick, as every one knows, is a delightful pastime, which consists in two men standing a few feet apart, and rapping each other over the head with long poles. There is a good deal of fun in it, so long as you are not hit; but a hit -- in the judgment of discreet persons -- spoils the sport completely. When this pastime is practiced by connoisseurs ashore, they wear heavy, wired helmets, to break the force of the blows. But the only helmets of our tars were those with which nature had furnished them. They played with great gun-rammers.

Sparring consists in playing single-stick with bone poles instead of wooden ones. Two men stand apart, and pommel each other with their fists (a hard bunch of knuckles permanently attached to the arms, and made globular, or extended into a palm, at the pleasure of the proprietor), till one of them, finding himself sufficiently thrashed, cries enough.

Hammer-and-anvil is thus practiced by amateurs: Patient No. 1 gets on all-hours, and stays so; while patient No. 2 is taken up by his arms and legs, and his base is swung against the base of patient No. 1, till patient No. 1, with the force of the final blow, is sent flying along the deck.

Head-bumping, as patronized by Captain Claret, consists in two [sailors] butting at each other like rams. This pastime was an especial favorite with the Captain. In the Dog-Watches, Rose-Water and May-Day [two of the sailors] were repeatedly summoned into the lee waist to tilt at each other, for the benefit of the Captain's health.

My head hurts. I don't want to go to sea anymore.

Sailors and Mail

In Chapter 48, Melville describes the roles of the Purser, the Purser's Steward, and the Postmaster in a Man-of-war. Although there were as many as 500 men crammed onto one of these ships, it must have been a lonely existence to endure a three-year cruise. It was, after all, pretty much the SAME 500 men for all three years. So one can imagine the appeal of mail call, in this time before email, air mail, or shipboard radio or telegraph. Melville's example of the desparation of the sailer with no mail really brings it home:

Ex-officio, the Purser's Steward of most ships is a sort of Postmaster, and his office the Post-office. When the letter-bags for the squadron -- almost as large as those of the United States mail -- arrived on board the Neversink, it was the Purser's Steward that sat at his little window on the berth-deck and handed you your paper -- if anty there were to your address. Some disappointed applicants among the sailors would offer to buy the epistles of their more fortunate shipmates, while yet the seal was unbroken -- maintaining that the sole and confidential reading of a fond, long, domestic letter from any man's home, was far better than no letter at all.

Now that's lonely.

More Books at Sea

Melville's ruminations on books and Providence reminded me of a neat trick he pulled in Moby Dick. After discussing in learned detail the various methods of classification of whales of the ancient and modern authorities, Melville presented his own idiosyncratic system that only a true lover of books could invent:

Now, then, come the grand divisions of the entire whale host.

First: According to magnitude I divide the whales into three primary BOOKS (subdivisible into CHAPTERS), and these shall comprehend them all, both small and large.

I. THE FOLIO WHALE; II. THE OCTAVO WHALE; III. THE DUODECIMO WHALE.

As the type of the FOLIO I present the Sperm Whale; of the OCTAVO, the Grampus; of the DUODECIMO, the Porpoise.

FOLIOS. Among these I here include the following chapters:--I. The Sperm Whale; II. the Right Whale; III. the Fin Back Whale; IV. the Humpbacked Whale; V. the Razor Back Whale; VI. the Sulphur Bottom Whale.

. . . .

OCTAVOES. These embrace the whales of middling magnitude, among which at present may be numbered:--I. the Grampus; II. the Black Fish; III. the Narwhale; IV. the Killer; V. the Thrasher.

. . . .

DUODECIMOES.--These include the smaller whales. I. The Huzza Porpoise; II. The Algerine Porpoise; III. The Mealy-mouthed Porpoise.

For those in the know who can distinguish among the bound paper varieties of folios, octavoes and duodecimoes, Melville includes this helpful footnote concerning the absence of the Quarto from his classification system: "Why this [Octavo] book of whales is not denominated the Quarto is very plain. Because, while the whales of this order, though smaller than those of the former order, nevertheless retain a proportionate likeness to them in figure, yet the bookbinder's Quarto volume in its diminished form does not preserve the shape of the Folio volume, but the Octavo volume does." I'm a footnote enthusiast, and I really appreciate Melville thinking through his system enough to include this little gem.

Melville II: Books and Providence

What to do to fill those empty shipboard hours? Time to read is one of the things that makes me want to go to sea. (It may be the only thing!) Note Melville's conclusion to Chapter 41:

I was by no means the only reader of books on board the Neversink. Several other sailors were diligent readers, though their studies did not lie in the way of belles-lettres. Their favorite authors were such as you may find at the book-stalls around Fulton Market; they were slightly physiological in their nature. My book experiences on board of the frigate proved an example of a fact which every book-lover must have experienced before me, namely, that though public libraries have an imposing air, and doubtless contain invaluable volumes, yet, somehow, the books that prove most agreeable, grateful, and companionable, are those we pick up by chance here and there; those which seem put into our hands by Providence; those which pretend to little, but abound in much.

Admittedly, the circumstances of my possessing and reading White-Jacket made these words ring especially true: my copy is a 1970 Northwestern Newberry paperback critical edition with a parchment-colored cover featuring prominent coffee stains in the upper left corner. CRAIG KOHLER is fond of sharpies and capital letters, having recorded his ownership of this fine volume on the inside of the front cover. Thomas E. Turpin was more understated in style during his term of ownership, but went overboard in proclamation -- he rubber-stamped his name inside the front cover, inside the back cover, and on the top, right and bottom edges of the book (where the edges of the pages all meet together). I THINK I bought this book at a yard sale for a quarter, along with a companion volume of Mardi (another Melville novel) from the same series, also generously stamped by Mr. Turpin. Somehow, though, Mardi escaped CRAIG KOHLER's sharpie. Must have been an oversight. In any case, thanks to CRAIG KOHLER and Thomas E. Turpin for purchasing, preserving and passing along this excellent work. And thanks to Providence for putting it into my hands!

Melville on Vocation: You Are What You Do; or, Beware the Lonely Light-House Man

And now, by special engagement, a few choice excerpts from Herman Melville's "White-Jacket; or The World in a Man-of-War"! Today's selection is from Chapter 12 and concerns the author's theory of the effects of environment on one's attitude and outlook.

The truth seems to be, indeed, that all people should be very careful in selecting their callings and vocations; very careful in seeing to it, that they surround themselves by good-humored, pleasant-looking objects; and agreeable, temper-soothing sounds. Many an angelic disposition has had its even edge turned, and hacked like a saw; and many a sweet draught of piety has soured on the heart, from people's choosing ill-natured employments, and omitting to gather round them good-natured landscapes. Gardeners are almost always pleasant, affable people to converse with; but beware of quarter-gunners, keepers of arsenals, and lonely light-house men. And though you will generally observe, that people living in arsenals and light-houses endeavor to cultivate a few flowers in pots, and perhaps a few cabbages in patches, by way of keeping up, if possible, some gayety or spirits; yet, it will not do; their going among great guns and muskets, everlastingly mildews the blossoms of the one; and how can even cabbages thrive in a soil, whereunto the moldering keels of shipwrecked vessels have imparted the loam?

It would be advisable for any man, who from an unlikely choice of a profession, which it is too late to change for another, should find his temper souring, to endeavor to counteract that misfortune, by filling his private chamber with amiable, pleasurable sights and sounds. In summer time, an AEolian harp can be placed in your window at a very trifling expense; a conch-shell might stand on your mantel, to be taken up and held to the ear, that you may be soothed by its continual lulling sound, when you feel the blue fit stealing over you. For sights, a gay-painted punch-bowl, or Dutch tankard -- never mind about filling it -- might be recommended. It shold be placed on a bracket in the pier. Nor is an old-fashioned silver ladle, nor a chased dinner-castor, nor a fine portly demijohn, nor any thing, indeed, that savors of eating and drinking, bad to drive off the spleen. But perhaps the best of all is a shelf of merrily-bound books, containing comedies, farces, songs, and humorous novels. You need never open them; only have the titles in plain sight. For this purpose, Peregrine Pickle is a good book; so is Gil Blas; so is Goldsmith.

But of all chamber furniture in the world, best calculated to cure a bad temper, and breed a pleasant one, is the sight of a lovely wife. If you have children, however, that are teething, the nursery should be a good way up stairs; at sea, it ought to be in the mizzen-top. Indeed, teething children play the very deuce with a husband's temper. I have known three promising young husbands completely spoil on their wives' hands, by reason of a teething child, whose worrisomeness happened to be aggravated at the time by the summer-complaint. With a breaking heart, and my handkerchief to my eyes, I followed those three hapless young husbands, one after the other, to their premature graves.

Wow. Now that's literature. I won't even attempt to comment, other than to requote the last sentence of the first paragraph: "How can even cabbages thrive in a soil, whereunto the moldering keels of shipwrecked vessels have imparted the loam?" And to think I used to hate fiction!

Watch out for those lonely light-house men.