Dear Mr Vice President:

I heard part of your Turning Point USA interaction tonight, and bravo.  I am writing, though, about something less heartening, an emerging scandal at Stanford University.  

Recent reports on Fox and in The Stanford Review say that Stanford University has been hosting a political activist organization, Stanford's Cyber Policy Center, which has pushed for a global censorship regime.  The Stanford Review states:  "Stanford’s Cyber Policy Center serves as a crucial institutional node, providing convening power, academic legitimacy, and technical capabilities to link foreign censorship regimes with each other and with the US technology ecosystem."

Under Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c)(3), tax exemption is unavailable to political institutions, and it is evident that Stanford's Cyber Policy Center is a political institution.   Its support for censorship is un-American and antithetical to the spirit of American history and culture. 

That an organization that advocates censorship flourishes at the highest levels of Stanford University suggests that Stanford is an institution beyond repair and undeserving of both public financial subsidy and tax exemption under IRC 501(c)(3). 

I urge you to end federal funding of Stanford, to end its tax exemption, and to investigate its officers for criminal tax fraud.  I also urge an investigation under the Logan Act as it appears that Stanford's faculty have engaged with foreign governments to undermine US policy, specifically, the First Amendment to the Constitution.  

I cannot express how distressed I am that US academic institutions are receiving public money and tax support to collude with foreign governments to attack freedom of expression. Stanford University is an anti-social disgrace, and it should be treated as such. 

Sincerely,

Mitchell Langbert, Ph.D.

Current Activities

Hudson Valley One covered my candidacy in the Town of Olive town supervisor race here. Although I lost to my able opponent, Jim Sofranko, I continue to work on important projects and to teach full-time.  There may be a series of law suits at CUNY concerning issues that I, as a named plaintiff, cannot publicly discuss.  As well, I am working on a large-scale research project with the Marnell brothers, Bob, Matt, and Mark.  

The Washington Post recently published Niall Ferguson's op-ed about the founding of Austin University, a university devoted to academic freedom. Professor Ferguson's op-ed spends a paragraph on my research on political affiliation of university professors.  Last February the Atlanta Journal-Constitution quoted me on outdoor work, and in August WalletHub quoted me on CLUE reports. 

Earlier this year Studies in Higher Education, the education journal that is highest ranked by the Australian Business Deans Council, the journal ranking  most important to business schools globally, published Sean Stevens's and my piece "Partisan Registration of Faculty in Flagship Colleges." Langbert and Stevens's "Partisan Registration and Contributions in Flagship Colleges," published in 2020, is still available on the National Association of Scholars' blog.

I will continue to teach full-time for the next few years and continue to live in the Catskill Mountains near Phoenicia, Woodstock, Liberty, and Kingston. I am traveling to Curacao in the first half of January.  If you need to reach me, please use my home email address mlangbert@hvc.rr.com. No hate mail, please.  

My Candidacy for Town Supervisor of the Town of Olive

Update: I lost the election.  

My chief interests in running are (1) property rights, (2) freedom of choice, (3) respect for home rule and localism, (4) volunteerism coupled with traditional values. I currently teach at Brooklyn College, a division of the City University of New York. I have been a full-time Olive resident since 2009 and first bought my house here in 1997. I went to summer camp in the area from 1964 to 1971.

Having grown up in Astoria, Queens, I attended the Bronx High School of Science, SUNY Binghamton, and Sarah Lawrence College. I finished two MBAs, one from UCLA and another in insurance from what is now the St. Johns University School of Risk Management. I went on for a Ph.D. in industrial and labor relations at Columbia.

I worked for ten years in corporate America in the human resource and employee benefit departments of several Fortune-listed corporations, including Johnson and Johnson’s corporate office.

In 1991 I served on the staff of the New York State Assembly Ways and Means Committee, where I worked on NYS pensions and the Office of General Services budget.

Since ‘91 I have worked as a professor of business administration and industrial relations, teaching about 10,000 students at Brooklyn College, NYU, Iona, and other colleges. I have published in excess of 30 academic articles on HR, employee benefits, and faculty political affiliation.

Issues

Taxes

Taxes need to remain low so that families and retirees are not forced to move away.  

 Town Plan and Property Rights

The town plan should emphasize residents' rights to own and use their property as they desire. 

Local Control 

Town authority should be retained and not transferred to New York City, New York State, or to regional authorities. 

Airbnb's

The issue of Airbnb's is complex. Externalities need to be balanced with property rights. My rights extend to where I affect yours.

Many local businesses profit from the money that comes into the town from Airbnb's. These include Tetta's Market, Olive's country store, the gas stations, Boiceville Supermarket, Marty's Mercantile, and property maintenance business. Many times the way an Airbnb is maintained is actually much nicer than if the owner themselves maintained it for personal use only and actually helps the neighborhood look nicer.  

Most local Airbnb's are quiet 99% of the time. These are two- or three-bedroom places that small families use to get away from the noise and bustle. In a few cases there may be issues concerning noise and disturbances.

I suggest the principle of observability. If noise and failure to maintain septic systems are not felt by neighbors, they are private. To the extent that they are observable by neighbors, then the neighbors can file a complaint, and the town must impose a fine to penalize legitimate harm.

There are additional questions of balance. Congestion that blocks thoroughfares cannot be allowed, but parked cars that do not obstruct are not an issue.

There is no need for regulation or inspection. These should be replaced by penalties that are sufficient to deter observable violations. In other words, penalties should be high, but regulatory costs and regulatory interference in property rights should be minimal. Maximal monetary penalties should be imposed on out-of-town visitors who are indifferent to residents' privacy, property, and personal rights.

An emphasis on liability rather than inspection can balance behavior so that property rights are respected and retirees can profit from their real estate while other residents are not harmed.

 

  

Letter to Google's Director of Litigation Concerning Removal of Material from This Blog

PO Box 130

West Shokan, NY 12494

July 21, 2020

Catherine Lacavera, Director

IP and Litigation

Google LLC
1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
Mountain View, CA 94043

Sent via Certified Mail

Dear Ms. Lacavera:

I have been using Google’s Blogger for more than ten years. On July 20, the posts  I wrote from January 31 to July 20 were removed from the blog. I would like an explanation as to whether Google removed the material; if so, why Google removed the material; and of Google’s position on its right to remove the material. 

On July 20, I posted the name and address of a New York Times editor whom Tucker Carlson had named as having revealed or having been about to reveal Carlson’s name and address.  I would like to know whether Google views publication of this information as a violation of its terms of service, why, and whether you see a distinction between the Times’s revealing Carlson’s information and my revealing a Times editor’s information.  Also, I would appreciate your comment on the Times’s policy and why you think Google’s is better.

As well, I would appreciate confirmation that Google rather than an outside hacker removed the material from my blog, which is at http://mitchell-langbert.blogspot.com/ .

Sincerely,

Mitchell Langbert, Ph.D.

 

Freda Bernstein Langbert, RIP

My wife of almost 24 years, Freda, died on January 26. My love for her will never die. The funeral will be today, Friday, January 31, at the Gromley Funeral Home in Phoenicia, NY.  Her obituary appears in the Kingston Daily Freeman. A number of local poets and one of her family members have expressed an interest in  collecting her poems and turning them into a book. I have begun putting them in touch with each other and planning the project.

There are stars whose light reaches the earth only after they themselves have disintegrated and are no more. And there are people whose scintillating memory lights the world after they have passed from it.  These lights--which shine in the darkest night--are those which illuminate for us the path.

--Hannah Senesh

Shakespeare on Dershowitz

Toward the end of  Shakespeare's Henry V, Fluellen, King Harry's self-appointed mentor, remarks on the king's glorious victory at Agincourt:

FLUELLEN

By Jeshu, I am your majesty's countryman, I care not
who know it; I will confess it to all the 'orld:  I
need not to be ashamed of your majesty, praised be
God, so long as your majesty is an honest man.

What Dershowitz did in his speech yesterday is outline in vivid terms the contours of duties of public officials to the public and to the nation, both in economic and in democratic terms.  No one has fashioned a regime of fiduciary duty of elected officials, but it needs to balance these concerns.  Dershowitz is not only resolving the impeachment debate but also outlining a doctrine of what the public ought to require of democratically elected politicians.

Dershowitz is now the most illustrious alum of Brooklyn College. I need not be ashamed, praised be G-d.

Didion on Conformity

"I am still committed to the idea that the ability to think for one's self depends on one's mastery of the language."

--Joan Didion

The Virginia Democratic Party Proposes Bill That Attacks Freedom of Speech

The Democratic Party in Virginia proposes a Virginia law that can be used to attack free speech.  House Bill 1627 says:

If any person, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, or harass any person, shall use a computer or computer network to communicate obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language, or make any suggestion or proposal of an obscene nature, or threaten any illegal or immoral act, he shall be is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. A violation of this section may be prosecuted in the jurisdiction in which the communication was made or received or in the City of Richmond if the person subjected to the act is one of the following officials or employees of the Commonwealth: the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.

Breitbart, the College Fix, von Mises Institute Cover "Flagship Colleges"

The study Sean Stevens and I recently put on the National Association of Scholars blog has been covered by mainstream sources, including Breitbart, the Von Mises Institute, the College Fix, WND, Campus Reform, Jonathan Turley Res Ipsa Loquitur, Legal Insurrection, Lucianne.com, Rutgers Forums, South Dakota War College, and LaCorte News.

Partisan Registration and Contributions of Faculty in Flagship Colleges

Sean Stevens and I have been working on a study of 12,372 professors in the two leading private and two leading public colleges in 31 states that make registration public (mostly closed-primary states).  The National Association of Scholars has posted our findings on their blog. We cross-checked each registration against the political donations.  For party registration, we find a D:R ratio of 8.5:1, which varies by rank of institution and region.  For federal donations (from the FEC data base) we find a D:R ratio of 95:1, with only 22 Republican donors(compared to 2,081 Democratic donors) out of 12,372 professors.  Federal donations among all categories of party registration, including Republican, favor the Democrats: D:R donation ratios for Democratic-registered professors are 251:1; for Republican-registered professors 4.6:1; for minor-party-registered professors 10:0; for unaffiliated professors 50:1; for non-registered professors 105:1. We include a school-by-school table that facilitates comparisons. 

  

Senator McSally: You Said the Right Thing

Dear Senator McSally:

I've sent you a $100 contribution to thank you for standing up to CNN reporter Manu Raju.   The American media has deteriorated to the point at which treating them with contempt or ignoring them are the best options for those who are not antagonistic toward the United States, freedom of speech, and freedom of enterprise.

The American media does not serve an informational purpose but rather is a state-supported publicity industry for the Democratic Party and the Deep State, including both RINOs and Democrats.  To restore the possibility of progress and of freedom, there needs to be a rethinking as to the monopoly privileges the state has bestowed on the tech industry, on the air-wave networks, and on the cable networks. 

The New Deal marked the beginning of Deep State subsidization of the media through litmus tests concerning support of treaty-globalization, state-subsidized finance, and big government in exchange for monopoly privileges. Those subsidies need to end, and the media needs to be rebalanced.

Sincerely,


Mitchell Langbert

Should You Have to Be 21 to Smoke?

Dan Klein raises this question at Econlib.org:   Does the recent federal law increasing the smoking age to 21 make sense?  He turns to the great observer of 1830s America, Alexis De Tocqueville,  for clues. 

A couple of times, back in early Millennium days, I asked my classes of 65  NYU MBA students, who were graduates of elite colleges around the country, whether they were familiar with de Tocqueville, and no more than two or three percent had heard of him (one or two per class of 65). The state of the higher education system, which on average spent $27,000 per student in 2018, is that students who graduate are unfamiliar with the rudiments of history, culture, and literature.  They are likely worse educated than the elementary-school-educated Americans of de Tocqueville's day, who read the classics as well as the Bible. 

Klein recounts that the America de Tocqueville saw was one where boys and girls became men and women at the beginning of adolescence;  Americans could think for themselves at the onset of adulthood; girls were the most self-reliant and self-confident in the world; boys became land speculators and entrepreneurs before they were what we would call men. Moreover, business people never dreamt of relying on government because they were self-reliant. People voluntarily helped each other. Crimes were rapidly punished.

Klein notes this quote from de Tocqueville: “Americans believe their freedom to be the best instrument and surest safeguard of their welfare.”  

How sharply the observations of de Tocqueville differ from those of John Dewey, the early twentieth century philosopher of education.  Dewey believed that schools need to provide a plastic, manipulated environment that provides learning through experience.  Experiential learning is not to involve the real world of profit and loss, and it is to be guided by omniscient teachers.  

The Antifa students of today have so internalized the rules of America's left-wing schoolmarms that they often have trouble making a living and instead spend their lives attacking those who do not conform to the left-wing rituals of the academic Temples of Political Correctness.   

I wonder about the degree to which American education has not only debilitated most Americans intellectually but also made them more immature by encouraging a culture of dependency cloaked in experiential learning.

Letter to Babson College's President Stephen Spinelli in Defense of Prof. Asheen Phansey

Dear President Spinelli:

I urge you to reconsider the firing of Asheen Phansey.  I hold diametrically opposite views to Prof. Phansey’s, but more important considerations of freedom of speech and academic freedom should be given priority over matters of taste and opinion.  Even if Prof. Phansey hadn’t been joking, firing him for his views would still have been a mistake.  Recall John Stuart Mill: “If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.” Mill’s position is central to anything resembling a free society, but it is even more important to academic culture because without freedom of speech and the freedom to make mistakes, innovation and creativity die. 



Sincerely,




Mitchell Langbert, Ph.D.


Postscript: See FIRE's piece on Professor Phansey here.

My Panel Talk at the Queens Village Republican Club

The Queens Village Republican Club, the country's oldest Republican club, invited me to participate in a three-professor panel about higher education reform.  The chair of the club, Phil Orenstein, is an old friend.  The meeting was on January 2, 2020.  There were about 100 members in the audience--an enthusiastic group of strong Trump supporters--an oasis in the authoritarian wasteland that was New York City. Phil told me that the club has about 200 dues-paying members. The talk went well, and I made many new friends.

Queens VIllage Republican Club Invites Me to Participate in Higher Ed Panel

The Queens Village Republican Club, the country's oldest Republican club, has asked me to participate in a panel on higher education at their monthly meeting on January 2. As well, I wrote an op-ed for their newsletter, The Queens Village Eagle.   They have about 200 dues-paying members.  The meeting will be at the Holliswood Jewish Center, 86-25 Francis Lewis Boulevard, Holliswood, NY 11427.

Win-Win Gains from a Libertarian Party Cross-Nomination of President Trump

 Dear Mr. President:

Have you thought of negotiating a cross-nomination deal with the Libertarian National Committee?

I am a lifelong supporter of Libertarian Party candidates.  I have since concluded that you can do more to further the cause of freedom than the LP can, so I will support and have been supporting you and the NRCC over the past couple of years.  Why not negotiate the LP's cross nomination of you in 2020?

The following chart shows that the LP won 2.2% to 4.15% in the six battleground states, more than enough to put you well over the top.

Battleground States/ LP Percentage

Florida                    /          2.20%
Wisconsin               /          3.60%
Pennsylvania         /         2.40%
Michigan               /          3.60%
New Hampshire    /         4.15%
Nevada                 /             3.30%

Although I have not been active in the LP since 1983, I can imagine at least two bargaining chips that can result in mutual gains for both parties: first, an agreement to abolish a set of government agencies and programs that you don't mind abolishing (they want to abolish everything) and, second, an offer of placing Libertarians in powerful agency posts in which they can gut government programs.  In exchange, they would throw you the percentages that secure a win.

For example, if you offer to abolish the Department of Education and a list of fluff that Rand Paul or Citizens Against Government Waste provides in exchange for LP support and/or offer them a dozen positions in areas like the NLRB, and EPA, they may be willing to make a deal. You would likely have an additional benefit by having people in positions of power who are hostile to the deep state and have little to lose in attacking it.

Sincerely,

Mitchell Langbert, Ph.D.

Students Thank Me for Exceptional Teaching

The college has a formal evaluation system, and there are teacher-rating systems available online.  Often, however, I receive thank-yous from students who have benefited from my courses.  I received one last fall from a student who had taken my class six years earlier, and several years ago I received one from someone who had taken a my course at NYU thirteen years earlier.  Some of the letters I've received in the past year follow:

Dear Professor,

Thank you so much for your time to correct my essay, I have learned from your comments and the class.
--Student LZ

Dear Professor Langbert,

I would like to express my gratitude for being one of your students. Thank you for allowing me to learn from my mistakes.
--Student BA

Dear Professor Langbert:

That was fast, amazing class, I learnt A lot

Dear Professor Langbert:

Thanks for your very informative lessons, you know so much amazing, enjoyed your class very much. 

Have a great winter break.

P.S. I showed my husband a nice video of one of your presentations, he enjoyed your opinions, proud you can stand up strong about your opinions, even if others disagree. You are so calm cool & collected & brilliant.

--Student RH

Dear Professor Langbert: 

Also, thank you for such an amazing semester. My major is Business Admin: Leadership and Human Resource Management with a minor in Business Law. I think after this class, I may want to practice Employment Law. 

You class really made me realize this is the field I want to be in. Have a great holiday! Hopefully we cross paths again soon! 

--Student AB

Dear Professor Langbert:

Thank you for a great semester,
--BD

Good evening professor,

Thank you for being my professor and I really enjoyed the lessons that you taught this semester. The book for this extra credit was very helpful for me since i am a finance major, and the basis of this book practically touches upon everything i have learned in my other classes. Happy holidays and have a wonderful year.

--Student JP

Hi Professor Langbert,

Thank you very much! It was a pleasure learning from the best of the best!  Hope you have a wonderful and safe holidays
--Student AA

Dear Professor:

I wish I had paid sturdy attention in your class in 2012. I finally got finished reading Ragged Dick and realize how much I see myself in this character. An immensely inspiring underdog story!

On this Thanksgiving I want to say thank you for planting the seed for my development.

I don't if you remember me. I am a former student. You might recall I cried in your class in 2012. The truth is, I was going through a lot(Manic Depression and all the Jazz), and in retrospect- Your class was the single most important moment in all of my years at college. 

I remember like it was yesterday. You, critiquing all my work. The red ink all over papers. Talks of socialism, freedom, individualism, and self-esteem. During that time I didn't understand it all. I was young, and very naïve. I couldn't even read at a 12th grade level, but I tried my best. You gave me a C+ in that class, and in retrospect that was the most important grade I have ever had. 

The thing is, I have over the course of my years been torn between Capitalism vs Socialism, Individuality vs Collectivism, and having Freewill vs being guided through Determinism. I read, read, and read. I read many books, watched many lectures, and had many debates. It wasn't until I realize during all this debating that all this exploring I was doing and mass confusion was merely making me more aware. Yes, I said it. It was increasing my understanding of the world. Of the polarity which is associated with everything. 

I can't say I agree with you on everything. But I do want to formally thank you for "putting the battery in my back" as is often said.You are an amazing teacher, and at one point my arch enemy. I hated how you made me dislike Obamanomics, and found vested interest in Billionaire tycoons like Elon Musk and Peter Thiel.

Thanks for your inspiration!

Your former student,

--Student HF

Thank you for a great, informational semester Professor. Happy Holidays!  

--Student BC

Thanks for great course and happy holidays. 

--Student NS

Need for an Antitrust Action against Comcast, TimeWarner, and Disney

Dear Mr. President:

The deterioration of the American media and its open partisanship should be addressed through an antitrust action.  More than 75 percent of airwave and cable broadcasters are in practice affiliated with the Democratic Party.  This came about because in the 1930s the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration illegally required ideological litmus tests in its granting of airwave monopolies.  

When the country had something of a dominant, bipartisan consensus, perhaps from the candidacy of Wendell L. Wilke through the George W. Bush administration, partisan monopoly of the airwaves was unimportant, although conservatives have never been happy. When the cable monopolies were established by local governments in the 1970s and 1980s, the extension of the New Deal system seemed natural, although by then the media was increasingly at odds with moderate Republicans. Moreover, the major parties had not diverged ideologically to the degree that they have since Goldwater and McGovern--and to a greater degree since Obama. Conservatives have lived with an unresponsive, monopolistic media for the past ninety years.

The recent handling of the impeachment hoax and the legacy media’s deceitful coverage of your presidency has intensified the issue.  At present, the Democratic media monopoly is becoming  an embarrassment, a system at odds with the preferences of the majority of Americans. Given that the media lacks professionalism and intersects with state influence—via the Democratic Party---the current system makes a mockery of Constitutional protection of freedom of the press. The current system is a state-granted monopoly that favors one party and is much like a totalitarian system. This is especially so of the stations owned by Comcast, TimeWarner, and Disney.    

There needs to be an antitrust action and a divestiture of airwave and cable networks from the Democrats so that airwave and cable control are wrested from Comcast and Disney and  fairly distributed among Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Greens, and others in rough proportion to their numbers in the population.

Sincerely,

Mitchell Langbert, Ph.D.

Cc: Robert Iger, The Walt Disney Co.

Brian L. Roberts, Chairman, Comcast Corporation
Joseph J. Simons, Chairman, Federal Trade Commission

Americans for Limited Government Calls for End to American Bar Association Accreditation of Law Schools

Americans for Limited Government has emailed a release that calls for the ending of American Bar Association accreditation of law schools.  ALG characterizes ABA accreditation as crony capitalism. They write: 

There is an inherent conflict of interest when lawyers are allowed to regulate the entrance of competitors into their field. Due, in part, to the ABA’s numerous requirements of law schools and its restrictions on the practice of law, millions of Americans are unable to afford legal services and are forced to represent themselves in the bewildering legal system. While it is hard to argue that the world needs more lawyers, the ABA accreditation system, by design, limits the number of opportunities to attend law school with the result being the capping new entrants into their field, a clear conflict of interest.  As such, the Department of Education should end the American Bar Association’s credentials to provide law school accreditation. 

As I have previously blogged, under Betsy DeVos the DOE has done too little to investigate left-wing influence on higher education.  The ALG's point is a little different: licensure is a market impediment, and a professional guild should not be permitted to limit access to a market. It is difficult to argue that the standards that apply to law schools raise the quality of lawyers to some minimum, below which malpractice would be the norm. Rather, the ABA standards are meant to restrict the supply of lawyers. 

The education system is not, on a number of levels, what it claims to be.  Yet, the DOE has done little in the way of investigation and research, much less reform.

Letter in Support of The First Lady

Ms. Melania Trump

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Ms. Trump:

I didn’t vote for your husband, but I support him now.  I wanted to voice special support in the face of the disgraceful treatment that the fake media has afforded you with respect to the White House Christmas decorations and Pamela Karlan’s mentioning of Baron. There are even uglier slanders online, which don’t need to be recited.

As a conservative professor, I have been attacked for my views in the past, most recently in the national media for remarks I put on my blog concerning my support for Justice Brett Kavanaugh. 

Putting myself in your place, I appreciate your toughness and resilience.  Upon consideration, you are the best First Lady of my 65-year lifetime.   Like you, Jackie Kennedy spoke five languages and was eminently graceful.  However, she had an easy time because of the media’s pro-Democratic Party bias.  No one has displayed more resilience, better taste, and more grace than you have.

Please keep up the great work. 

Sincerely,

Mitchell Langbert, Ph.D.