Prosecuting chalkers, not banksters.
Corporate media coverage of NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden has enjoyed the supposed irony of his reportedly seeking asylum in Ecuador, a country that U.S. journalists depict as failing to measure up to their standards of freedom.
“Should Snowden eventually land in Ecuador, he’ll find that the host government is hardly a champion of free expression,” asserted Cristina Lindblad of Bloomberg BusinessWeek (6/24/13).
“Others saw hypocrisy in a possible offer of asylum by a government that has aggressively pursued critics in the press for perceived slights and recently passed a media law that some call an assault on freedom of speech,” reported AP (6/24/13)
“Clearly Ecuador isn’t the logical, legitimate champion of freedom of expression globally,” declared Christopher Sabatini of Fox News Latino (6/28/13), in a piece headlined “Ecuador and Snowden: Really?”
Mark Weisbrot of the Center for Economic and Policy Research (Guardian, 6/27/13) points out there is, actually, a considerable amount of free expression in Ecuador:
Without defending everything that exists in Ecuador, including criminal libel laws and some vague language in a new communications law, anyone who has been to the country knows that the international media has presented a gross caricature of the state of press freedom there. The Ecuadorian private media is more oppositional than that of the U.S., trashing the government every day.
It does seem inadequate for U.S. media outlets to critique the level of free expression in the country where Snowden is seeking asylum without comparing it to the level of free expression in the country he is seeking asylum from. While the United States has on paper some of the best guarantees of the right to speak in the world, its practice is considerably more chilling.
The U.S. military has repeatedly targeted and killed journalists, claiming that reporters are legitimate targets. Washington imprisoned Al-Jazeera camera operator Sami al-Hajj for six years without a trial at Guantanamo; documents released through WikiLeaks later revealed that a primary reason for holding al-Hajj was to try to extract information from him about Al-Jazeera‘s newsgathering operations. When Yemen was about to release Abdulelah Haider Shaye, a journalist who had reported on the U.S.’s secret drone war in that country, Barack Obama personally intervened to make sure Shaye stayed in prison.
The Obama administration is increasingly trying to criminalize the release information the government wants kept secret to the press—and has indicated that reporting on such information is a crime as well.
Those are some of the big things the U.S. does to silence journalism it doesn’t like. But you might get a better sense of the state of free expression in the USA from a smaller case that illustrates how far we’ve come from the idea that citizens have a right to let their voices be heard: the case of chalk activist Jeff Olson.
Olson has reportedly admitted writing messages in chalk on sidewalks around Bank of America offices in San Diego, protesting the bank’s role in the financial crisis and urging consumers to move their money into credit unions. For this, San Diego city attorney Jan Goldsmith has brought vandalism charges against Olson that carry a potential sentence of 13 years in jail (San Diego Reader, 6/23/13).
First Amendment opponent Howard Shore
The city attorney’s office wanted to make it clear that it would not be arresting kids for playing hopscotch: “The People do not fear that this reading of section 594(A) will make criminals of every child using chalk. Chalk festivals may still be permitted. Kids acting without malice may still engage in their art.” “Without malice,” in this context, means “without political intent”; the city is more or less boasting here that Olson is being punished for the content of his speech—a clear violation of the First Amendment, right?
It doesn’t matter, because the judge in Olson’s case, Howard Shore, has declared his courtroom to be a First Amendment–free zone—granting a prosecutorial motion to forbid Olson from citing in his defense the phrases “First Amendment,” “free speech,” “free expression,” “public forum,” “expressive conduct” or “political speech.” “The State’s Vandalism Statute does not mention First Amendment rights,” Shore ruled (San Diego Reader, 6/25/13).
Just in case he hadn’t trampled the right to free expression enough, Shore later imposed a gag order on Olson, barring him from talking to the media about his case (San Diego Reader, 6/27/13). So in the United States, you can be banned from complaining that you’ve been forbidden to argue that being threatened with 13 years in prison for expressing your opinion with chalk is a violation of your free speech rights.
Sounds like something commentators in the official Chinese media should bring up next time a dissident seeks asylum in the U.S. It would make for some excellent propaganda.
* * *
Daily Kos has a petition calling on the San Diego city attorney to drop the absurd charges against chalk activist Jeff Olson. Judge Howard Shore has so far been unable to suspend the right to petition for redress of grievances.
UPDATE: The jury acquitted Jeff Olson on all counts. BuzzFlash (7/1/13), whose coverage of the case has been invaluable, reported that “Judge Howard Shore condemned the media after the acquittal for sensationalizing the case.” That irritating First Amendment again.
I just hope that they will drop the charges. Why? Consider the state of the bar in San Diego County. Are there any good First Amendment lawyers there? There are not. Moreover, there are very few good reporters there. Jim Larson writes trash. The San Diego Writer’s Ink folks still support him. I have asked for my complete, unused fifty dollar membership fee to the Center for the Book in San Diego to be refunded because of this atrocious abuse of the First Amendment. I will not contribute a penny to San Diego. I am sorry that I ever lived there. It is bad enough that the medical care is atrocious. It is bad enough that San Diego gives full reign to ridiculous non-profits like G.E.N.I, run by Peter Meisen, a self-professed follower of Buckminster Fuller who never actually even studied with Fuller. San Diego, like the rest of California, is for fascists. Isn’t that more than clear? As for Ecuador, I was there this February during the elections. Even with C.I.A. and Mossad everywhere, Correa prevailed. He will ride this out, I expect. Obama called Snowden a “29 year old hacker.” Obama doesn’t even know how old Snowden is. He is 30. I can actually say that I preferred freedom of expression under Bush. I attended a trade conference in D.C. when Bush was president. All of the diplomats and U.S. trade counselors expressed freely their opinions. A few years later when Obama took office, everyone was on message at the same trade conference. And the message was boring. Why? Now we know. Obama likes to do secret trade deals to further GMO in the European Union, while Michelle Obama invites Alice Waters from Chez Panise in Berkeley to plant an organic garden in the White House. Does any of this sound like the Third Reich to anyone but me? Can’t wait to leave the USA and never return. Especially, never to San Diego or anywhere else in California.
Great commentary on a very frightening case of hypocrisy.
Is the reference to the Daily Kos petition supposed to contain a hyperlink to the petition? I couldn’t find one.
The petition can be found here: http://campaigns.dailykos.com/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=455
In this country, you can go to jail for “defacing” public property
But apparently not for decimating the public interest
OMG! Thins US government have done to Al Jazeera are criminal.
Thanks, Tanya–the petition is now linked in the post.
Here is another reason to support this petition. Google these words “Jeremy Scahill Blackwater Monsanto”. You will find that Blackwater ops are tracking anti-Monsanto activists. A military contractor that did dirty work in Iraq is now doing dirty work against the interests of public health and free speech. When I bought a book by Scahill at a Hollywood bookstore when Bush was in office, Blackwater ops were at the store monitoring who bought Scahill’s books and actually trying to take them off of the shelves. The same thing happens at bookstores when Noam Chomsky publishes with the Mossad. I am not kidding. They don’t like it. Especially what Chomsky says about Israel. I have seen them do hilarious shenanigans at a Barnes& Noble in Pasadena when a Chomsky book came out. They all came in and stood at the counter and ordered pro-Israeli books about the walled city of Jerusalem that was part of Jordan until the Six Day War. These books were out of print and they knew it. They were just sending a message to those of us who wanted to buy the new Chomsky book, but wanted to buy it in a book store and not from Amazon.com. The message was that the Mossad is available all day and every day in the U.S.A. for censorship. The funniest thing was when a well known Hollywood actor who played in “Eyes Wide Shut” and “Michael Clayton” became part of the anti-Chomsky skit. This actor is dead now. He was a big friend of the architect Frank Gehry. He came into the book store and he leaned against the counter just like he did in “Eyes Wide Shut” against the pool table when he warned Tom Cruise not to investigate the orgy that he had seen. Are you guys sick of this sort of thing? I am. But that is freedom of the press in and around Los Angeles. It really does not exist.
If I were at me job and acted in such an autocratic, criminally negligent, incompetent manner as said judge Shore, I would get fired. Why is he allowed to get away with this?
Because he’s a judge, Ralphie-boy, and they can pretty much do what they want. Shore is a fine example of the Corporate state run amok; he’s clearly in their service. He would have fit right in in the Soviet Union in the 1950’s.
Ex-Congressman, Mayor Bob Filner of San Diego wrote a scathing letter to the District Attorney, castigating him for prosecuting this case before the chalker had been acquitted..
Judge Howard Shore should be removed from
the bench and disbarred on violations of the
U.S. Constitution (including the First Amendment).
I think should all rise up in a major
rebellion against the status quo of
political corruption and corporate greed!
Another case worth mentioning in this context: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2009/04/2009423233919457969.html
Judge Shore’s mustache is too wide. He should take a little off both sides, so it looks like the shadow that his nose casts at noon. I’d feel better, then… ^..^
If it weren’t true it would be considered a parody of officious anti-Bill of Rights attitudes in some areas of the court. Sickening that this so-called “judge” can retain his seat. I wonder if tar and feathering should be brought back for those who abuse their political and legal positions. Maybe extremism in defense of liberty just may be called for against such extremists who lie their way into office. Wouldn’t that be a nice bit of protection against such deviants and criminals in office?
It does not sound like your coming up with a lot to prove that the USA has no freedom of the press.I mean sure in our history we can find some aberrations.But they are few and far between.As shown by your scattergun evidence of such.For instance open your yap in North Korea,and before the sun sets into the ground…….you just might along with it.Now thats no freedom of the press!Ecuador?Yeah I have been there.Hell of a place to be marooned till your old and grey.A man without a country.Expelled to some God forsaken third world island of solitude.Yeah wise ass……Smart move taking a job just to spy on a country you detest.You got a few shots in.Even revealed some stuff that pissed us all off.But soon all the pertinent info you have will become dated.”Fixed’ if you like by the spooks who know how to plug the security leak.Then what?You alone.Always watching over your shoulder cause lets face it….these people play for keeps.And your adoring public?They dont know who the hell you are.Hell even Monica luinski has been forgotten by the new kiddy crowd.So that is your fate.All for 15 minutes of fame .Bet you thought you would get a reality show.Called “steal top secret info for cash and prizes”.maybe even that is shooting the gun…….you aint there yet …….SPY!!!!!
But this article simply _must_ provide us with the context of Judge Shore’s other rulings or verdicts. They’ve got to be staggering; something as bald as this example cannot be in isolation from other rulings.
corrective unconscious:
Don’t be lazy. That is just so USA. Especially California. Go get the judge’s other rulings yourself. Hire someone to go to the courthouse for you if you can’t get anything on LexisNexis. Do you think that FAIR has the time and the resources to write a law review article for you? That is not what FAIR is about. And, as for law reviews, they are very funny to publish in. Often very stupid. For example, one of my former editors, Susan Silbey, who I believe is now teaching Sociology at MIT, published once in a mainstream USA law school law review. She cited in the sociologist Max Weber. The editors of the law review–and it was a very prestigious law review–said, “Who is this Max Weber? Why do you need this Max Weber in your article?” She had to do a footnote that was an article in itself to tell the illiterate legal community who Max Weber was and is. Moral of the story–go do your homework, sir or madame. Mr. Jim Naureckas and his colleagues are busy.
After the acquittal, Judge Shore criticized the media for “sensationalizing” the case.
He was elected without opposition in 2002 and 2008. Hopefully, he will have some in 2014.
Jesus Jackie don’t call them my government.I may disagree with damn near every thing Obama does.but that does not mean i contenance a spy.Plain and simple a spy.A whistle blower is someone who has a job with the government lets say ,and finds wrong doing that he reports.A spy takes a job or enters into a area/situation he is not allowed with the intention to steal information. Of course he HOPES the results will validate his actions…. his deceit.But whether or not it does, or does not….he is a spy.
Michael e:
Lesen-Sie Deutsch? Ich hoffe dass Sie Deutsch lesen. http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/interview-mit-edward-snowden-im-spiegel-nsa-und-bnd-arbeiten-zusammen-a-909800.html
It is your USA government that is clearly and utterly the spy. And nothing more. Nothing works in the USA but the electronic security apparatus. They can’t even spy like in the days of ancient Rome and Greeece. Just go read the classics and you will see that. Dr. Ron Paul recently averred that spies spy on enemies. The USA government spies on its people. Hence, it thinks that its people are the enemy. (There are no logical fallacies in that argument. Go read Frederick Copplestone on logic. Copplestone’s introduction to logic. You don’t need what Patrick Suppes has written about logic to agree with Dr. Paul, MD.) Thus, should you be a USA citizen, you are now clearly the enemy. You will also see from the Spiegel article that the USA thinks that others are enemies who have committed no crimes as well. And if you go back and do research on e. rendition, you will find that your dear president Bill Clinton, the same one whose ride to power was greatly furthered by allowing a certain CIA air force base to be placed in Arkansas while he was governor there, really made e rendition into sport for your CIA et al. So do me a favor. Ask yourself if the recent Canadian academic who suggested that the American Revolution was a grand failure, and that it was high time that USA Americans admitted that, is not correct. By the way, if you can’t read German, don’t ask purported NGO expert Jayne Cravens of Coyotte Communications in or formerly of Oregon to read it for you. She worked in Germany. Her German is non-existent. And she has advised people to take jobs with CIA ops in Afghanistan that use anthropologists for canon fodder. So if you need a translator, Ms. Jayne Cravens will be not able to help you, I am afraid.
Jackie I dont need a translator(in German).And you make a seminal mistake.You tie personalities(presidents)into the success or failure of this country.This country is an ideal.The men who serve that ideal may fall short,But they are transient.The ideal remains.I agree with you that these excesses(in spying on the people) are completely out of hand.I agree that this administration more than others views the people as the enemy.Especially anyone who disagrees with them.You pointed out Clinton.I did a lot of work for him.Considered him a smart man.Broke with him when he lied under oath and to the people.So dont lose faith..or take direction on our country from foriegn nationalsWe still have fine people who could turn this all around.They simply are not serving at this time.Constitution in hand -God willing they will get the chance
Michael E: I have to disagree with your analysis at the same time that I ask your pardon for my bad spelling and my worse German diction. Should have been “lesen koennen” and not just “lesen.” As for the conflation of the man and the personality and the country, I must refer you to the signal classic written by Ernst Kantorowicz and published in 1957, The King’s Two Bodies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Kantorowicz The idea that there is a homology between a ruler and his or her people–both sybolically and otherwise– is something that Kantorowicz well established. It is not a matter of mere political theology from the Middle Ages. It exists today in the United States and elsewhere. I am very grateful for the good work of Pierre Bourdieu for bringing Mr. Kantorowicz to me. I don’t like that Bourdieu bought wholesale Erwin Panofsky’s reading of Aristotle’s notion of habitus from Panofsky’s work on Gothic Architecture to just reinvent structuralism without movement. That was dead wrong. Not what Aristotle wanted. Not at all what Gothic history–the various scholastic elenchae–i.e. multiple modes of logical thought that coexisted (sp?); the various conflicts among guilds that created Gothic architecture; the fact that military history itself during, after and before the Gothic age created what was and is Gothic architecture rather than any sort of linear history…All of this is what Panofsky, and, therefore, Bourdieu, got wrong. But Bourdieu is right about Kantorowicz. The King has two heads. So did your boss, Bill Clinton. Let us just hope that those who are in the USA can take Kantorowicz dead seriously. And I mean it. He was crucified because he did not sign on to McCarthyism. He was an outsider. His first work on Friederick the Great was not understood. So his work went underground. It is still relevant. People need to understand when they take power that they are more than just a symbol for their nation state or smaller unit of political domain. The homologies run deeper and are structures that have had a much longer run. They are also not tautologies. But the king always has two heads.
michel e:
I am afraid that Ms. Mraz has pegged you. As for Bill Clinton, this is the kind of thing that happened when he came to power. And I say power rather than office for good reason. Clinton eventually made Leobardo Estrada at UCLA able to do things at the Census Bureau that no rational demographer in his or her right mind would do. Estrada also gave illiterates–big time illiterati– at UCLA scholarships while he himself gorged on faculty freebies and supported Chicano Studies hunger strikes. He also signed off on lots of masters theses and dissertations that he never read. As for Ms. Mraz, Estrada made sure that she did not get a penny in financial aid at UCLA. Not only that, but when she challenged his promise to give her a scholarship with the ombudsman, Leobardo Estrada had her financial aid audited. He was evidently not happy to discover that she actually could prove that she needed much more than the loans that she borrowed from UCLA. Meanwhile back at the ranch, the “LA Times” reported something along the lines that Dr. Estrada could not have an appointment in the Clinton administration because he had a Zoe Baird problem. He had more problems that that and everyone at UCLA knows it. Especially Sylvia Sensiper. She sued him. The faculty senate censured him. But none of this was reported in the “LA Times.” Now, Ms. Mraz is emigrating to Ecuador and never returning the the USA. She can quote Panofsky, Bourdieu, Sartre, Marx, Goethe, Aristotle, Plato, Kantorowicz and many others. What about those hunger strikers for Chicano Studies at UCLA that Dr. Estrada supported? What can they quote? Can they even cite Groucho Marx with correct form? They know a bit about Frida Kahlo. What they learned from Hollywood movies, probably. And they know about Cesar Chavez. But probably not the expose about Chavez that was published in the LA Times around 2006 that showed what a terrorist he really was. What is the moral of the story? Ms. Mraz appears to have a library in her head and in her heart. Ecuador will be happy to have her, I imagine. Los Angeles will not care. They will be happy to do without someone with brains and tenacity. They always have been more than content with such lacks. Just ask Rogers Brubaker. I bet he would love to take the offer that Harvard gave him to join their Sociology Department years ago and to be not marooned at UCLA just because Harvard does not evidently give a damn about his wife ZsuZsa Berend. Does Los Angeles care that Brubaker is stuck here because Harvard does not want his wife? They don’t. Neither does Jackie Mraz, I would imagine.
Wollensky: Isn’t there a steak house in Chicago that bears your name? Smith and Wollensky? Is that you? Are you where the beef is? I agree with you that UCLA is where the beef is not. UCLA hired Andrew Apter. What a mistake. All he did in Africa was to sleep with informants. He does not at all understand the idea of micro-ethnography based on the principles of conversation analysis and symbolic interaction, whether put forth by Erving Goffman or any other sound scholar. I believe that a student at the University of Chicago–probably it was Jackie Mraz–tried to get him to study Hylton White. I hope that I have that scholar’s name correct. I do know it is not Hilton Head or Paris Hilton. The scholar is a favorite of Andrew Abbott at the U of Chicago and was a sociologist at Columbia in NYC. I believe that Ms. Mraz tried to tell Mr. Apter–I know someone did–that a good dialectic for research could evolve from the phenomenology of Goffman and the structure of White. Apter did not understand. As for UCLAW, when Tamie Bryant was up for tenure, UCLAW would not at all consider her PhD work done in Japanese family courts. Strange place, UCLA. Jackie is right to say good riddance to bad garbage and to go to Ecuador. I imagine that that is where the beef is just as much as UCLA is where the beef is not.
It would seem ludicrous to have a law protecting whistleblowers while at the same time whistleblowers are punished for their exposure of government wrongdoing. Why should our government keep the truth from us. Didn’t yhe government learn anything from the publishing of the Pentagon Papers? Did the government learn nothing from Iraq’s supposed “mushroom cloud in a year”? Did the government learn nothing from their “irrefutable proof of Iraq’s wmds. Did they learn nothing from “Iraq’s mobile labs”? Did they learn nothing from punishing the name of a CIA agent by giving their own whistleblower a slap on the wrist. It seems we are more and more becoming the land of the unfree. I wish someone would tell us just what secrets Snowden exposed to date. The government, I believe has more to fear in their pursuit of Snowden, that he may really expose some of our greivious mistakes.
Allen and Jacqueline.Nothing personal but I smell over educated elitism.I was fortunate to walk the halls of Princeton and Harvard, so I know it when I hear it.I would be interested in your education back- ground and political affiliations if you would be kind enough to share that(don’t worry I don’t work for Obama or his IRS)I also detect a faint whiff in the belief of the stupid ugly American.And possibly the aroma of blame America first.To Jackie we shall agree to disagree.I believe in the inherent ability of the people, and self governance.I believe in the separation of powers and all the walls against misuse of those powers(when used).I do not see presidents as pharos who create pyramids for the ages.Though their social welfare programs may stand as tenaciously(sic).Of course this is a philosophical discussion.While it is true that when a butterfly(president) flaps his wings here…it is felt in China…..In practicality 4 years helps to minimize his flapping about.And in balance that is the best we can do.And jackie…has it occurred to you that our founders considered many of the historical conundrums you set forth?
Michael e: I am so glad that you have degrees from Princeton and from Harvard. Guess what? I am more glad than that that I don’t. One degree that I don’t even have is a high school diploma. Other than that, I do have a lot of alphabet soup after my name. If I can quote Panofsky in German if I have to and Aristotle in Ancient Greek without a high school diploma…well…what can I say? What I can say is this. Three cheers for autodidacts. One must be an autodidact if one is unfortunate enough to be educated in the USA. Most of the teaching at most of the educational institutions is substandard at best and demeans a good intellect at worst.
Senor R Correa, El Presidente of Ecuador: Is it true that Live and Invest Overseas might possibly have USA intelligence gathering functions? Is it true what Senor Morales of Bolivia told me? He said that Lee Harrison, who is the correspondent for Live and Invest Overseas, thinks that I am just a “Democrat.” I guess that that means that I am like Obama. Does Lee Harrison think I am a gringo like Obama? Is it true that Kathleen Peddicord was an unsuccessful writer in Baltimore down the street practically from CIA headquarters at Langley when she suddenly at age 40 started a career as a high jump expert in living and investing overseas for Norte Americanos? Then why, Senor Correa, are you allowing her to hold a conference in Ecuador this October? Do you want us to sign up some Sandinistas? We have already started to buy up all of the property in Loja Ecuador that Peddicord’s husband Lief Simon wants to turn into a Silicon Valley for the USA. Where else, Senor Correa, do we need to invest in your beautiful country to keep the CIA and its friends out? Sandinistas of the world, unite. Do you want Ollie North in Ecuador? We don’t.
Jacki I am impressed by you and your frankness ,and in agreement on your ideas about advanced education.Although in Medicine much is to learned,I am not really a standard bearer of ivy league institutions turning out the best of the best.I could go on for hours knocking them,but what is the use.Like anything else or anyplace you experience you get what you put into it.You hope you learn things that will serve you well though it is not always so.Your iQ is yours were ever you go.From day one. There are brilliant truck drivers and doctors so thick that it is amazing.I have met quality wonderful intelligent people in every walk of life ,and in every place I have been.And I have met the opposite.One saying has always guided me.”Every man is my superior in that I may learn from him”.If I could do it again…….Id spend more time in the mountains a on the ocean titles be damned.Life is too short.Now you did not tell me your political affiliations.The floor is still yours
Are Judges elected san diego?
And now Princeton, eh, m.e.? What next, Oxford?
Mary Douglas Redux: We need Mary Douglas in the house. Where is she? I love her work on the anthropology of leprosy and also her work with Aaron Wildavsky on the anthropology of risk. Her work on purity and danger is great. But everybody and their sister knows it. Nobody, however, has adequately pursued her work on risk. Here’s a slogan I am going to pursue her work on risk under: “There’s no accounting for culture; but how there’s accounting for taste.” You might think that I would start with Priscilla Ferguson at Columbia with this. Or with Wendy Griswold or with Michelle Lamont. Each of these are sociologists of culture. Nope. But I will get my bearings with Columbia’s sociology departnent. With this guy. I quote below from the Columbia Sociology faculty website:
Harrison C. White
Harrison C. White
Biographical Note:
Harrison C. White has published both field studies and mathematical analyses of business firms and market operation. He is a founder of the joint doctoral program between sociology, psychology, and the business school at Harvard University and University of Arizona, and he has served on the board of directors of an urban system consulting firm. His current work centers on control processes through agency, and how this shapes the use of time.
I am greatly appreciate to Andrew Abbott at the U of Chicago for bringing Harrison C. White’s work to my attention. A dialectic with Erving Goffman and Harrison C. White is great stuff for research and practice. Especially for students who can’t read French, German, Italian or Spanish…
Pancho: Who are you? Don Quixote’s sidekick Sancho Panza? Goffman is still great stuff. So is Harrison C. White. It’s not a true dialectic. Can’t be. It’s more along the lines of a three value truth table from phenomenological logic. You know. That fun stuff.
No Tim Although I have visited that wonderful historic institution. I never attended.I have been very fortunate in my education.But honestly what I have seen since of other institutions of far less “pedigree”is that both Princeton and Harvard are over rated.Or at least that there are many many schools who are just as good for any number of fields.I once met a man who had little education but was an amazing artisan.He was given an Iq test and it was off my chart.So in no way imagine I am bragging.I am kind of in opposition to that whole thought process.It is simply my experience.If I were a farmer who never went past grade school my “intelligence”level would be the same.Sobering realization to all the airs we put on.