On this day in 1877, Henry Ossian Flipper became the first African American to graduate from West Point. He went on to be the first non-white officer to lead on the all-black regiments who were being used to kill the Native American tribes throughout the United States. He was generally considered a fine officer. But he only stayed in the Army for five years. The entire time, he faced intense racism. Eventually, his bigoted supervisor William Rufus Shafter manage to railroad Flipper through a Court Martial. Despite the fact that he was found innocent of the charge, he was found guilty of a lesser charge — “conduct unbecoming an officer” — that was introduced in the middle of the trial. Although white officers had previously gotten wrist slaps after being found guilty of the far more serious charge of embezzlement, Flipper was thrown out of the Army.
Flipper did have his defenders, however, and he went on to have a good career as a civil servant. At first he worked as a a civil engineer but eventually became an adviser on revolutionary politics in Mexico for Senator Albert Fall. When Fall because Secretary of the Interior, Flipper followed him. He finished out his career as an engineer for the petroleum industry in Venezuela. He retired to his home state of Georgia, and died at the age of 84.
What I think is interesting about Flipper’s story is how it shows that the end of slavery was very important to the equality in this country. But it was just one step of an endless number of steps. The people who claim that we are in a post-racial time were matched by people in Flipper’s time who also claimed that there was nothing that needed to be done. After all: slavery was over! The struggle goes on and on. Henry Ossian Flipper could not possibly have been any better a person, yet he was nonetheless dumped on by individuals and establishment alike.
We mark this day 138 years ago when one more step was taken in the cause of equality.
Back on 17 November 2014, I reported, 
We are in the midst of a debate around criminal justice right now, a timid one no doubt, but a debate nonetheless. In the midst of such debates it is customary for pundits, politicians, and writers like me to sally forth with numbers to demonstrate the breadth and width of the great American carceral state. The numbers are, indeed, bracing and are not hard to find. The fact that African Americans comprise some one in 200 of all known people in the world, and yet African American men comprise one in 12 of all known prisoners has always given me pause…
I want to go back to that 
There is one thing that all Republicans know: Obamacare is an unmitigated disaster that is destroying the great system that we had before — “The best healthcare in the world!” But their real problem with it is not the policy. As I’ve discussed a lot around here: Obamacare is the most conservative healthcare reform that could work. All the supposed conservative alternatives since have been brainless ideology that would have made the situation worse — things like tort “reform” (not allowing patients to sue when they’ve been harmed) and allowing insurance across state lines (destroying local control and causing a race to the bottom).
On this day in 1777, the stars and stripes were adopted by the Second Continental Congress as the official flag of our country — or at least our little rebellion. To be honest, I’m not fond of it. It’s badly designed. There’s a blue rectangle in the upper left hand cover with a variable number of stars. Don’t get me wrong: I like one star for each state. But I don’t like them relegated to the corner in such an awkward way. And the 13 stripes representing the first colonies? I really don’t care. Maybe we should have eight red stripes to correspond to the eight slave states at that time. Not that they weren’t all culpable.
Anyway, I remember telling my first wife that I didn’t like our flag. She snapped at me, “What do you want? Three stripes like Italy?” I was too shamed to respond, but the truth is: yes, I would prefer that. But what I had in mind was the Soviet Union’s flag, which I still think is gorgeous. But there are many beautiful flags today. I like the simplicity and the symbolism with the Japanese flag. Israel’s flag is arguably better on these counts. Canada has a very fetching flag. There is much to say for Papua New Guinea’s flag with the Southern Cross and its national bird, the raggiana bird-of-paradise. I could go on. And on. And on. There are only a handful of flags that I like less.
Not that any of this matters. A nation needs a distinct flag and we have that. But it annoys me that we could never change it. If anyone tried, Americans would rise up and claim that it is a wonderful flag and we could never admit to being wrong. Just as our 225 year old Constitution is the best one imaginable (except it isn’t), our 240 year old flag couldn’t possibly be improved upon. So we are stuck with it.
There are two large difficulties with equal opportunity as a principle of justice. First, what exactly should be this hypothetical moment of perfect equality — the equal starting line, to use the metaphor of a footrace? Should it be birth? This means that the unequal distribution of luck before birth must be counterbalanced, so that those who are congenitally stronger or more clever should be disadvantaged in equal measure. If that doesn’t appeal to you, then you perhaps imagine a moment even before birth and before genetic qualities are doled out. But related to this is the problem that, as soon as we are born, we begin to do things or have things done to us that, if not offset, will lead to unequal life chances down the road. The further back we push the moment of equality, the more subsequent inequality we must accept. If opportunities are to be equal at birth, then the advantages that some get in childhood will not count against “equal opportunity.” Perhaps you would set a much later age for the “starting point” — say 18. This commits you to much greater intervention to offset all the many pluses and minuses that can accrue by that age, including many that are due to the choices that children make for themselves. At the same time, it can be seen as a bit heartless, since it doesn’t allow for second chances. If someone discovers what they truly want at the age of 25 or so, too bad: they missed the moment of equality and they will have to make do with whatever opportunities they are lucky enough to still have. This sort of criticism can be addressed by requiring a multiplicity of “somewhat equal opportunities” that can reappear as one grows older, but then the criterion loses its sharpness: how equal must these second chances be and how many must be offered?
Timothy Taylor wrote an article that answers a question that I’ve wondered about for a while, 
The other part of this is that I saw my parents treat the actual employees they had fairly badly. And they were not at all exceptional — I’ve seen it countless times with employers I’ve had as well as ones I’ve observed from the outside. They live in constant fear of bankruptcy. They never feel secure, even when things are going really well. And they expect their employees to care as deeply about the business as they do. Sadly, employees often do feel deeply committed to the business. But they are rewarded with bad pay and treatment until they finally have enough.
We Democrats all admire Obama. But unlike the stereotype, we don’t worship him. We’ve had a lot of problems with many of his policies. And I do mean “we.” Obviously, as a functional Democrat — I’m a member of the party because it is the more liberal of the two major parties, not because I agree with it — I have even bigger problems with President Obama. But he has never been so clearly outside the current thinking of the Democratic Party as he is on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). So now was a really good time for the Democrats in the House of Representatives to say what needed to be said, “Suck. On. This.”
I’m not a big fan of Jean Sibelius. In fact, he is just the kind of Romantic composer that I’m thinking of when I say that I don’t like Romantic music. But that isn’t to say that he wasn’t a great composer. And he certainly didn’t commit any of the truly vile sins of the period like mindless chromaticism. And there are some times when you really want Romantic music. It is still very much alive in many film scores.