Republican leaders are recognizing that the sight of Republican lawmakers heckling the president of the United States didn’t do their party any favors. It not only called attention to their behavior, it prompted many news outlets to fact-check President Biden’s claim that Republicans had called for cuts to Social Security and Medicare or even called to get rid of them. Those outlets noted that while Republicans have repeatedly said they have no intention of cutting those programs, what Biden said was true: Republican leaders have repeatedly suggested such cuts, or even the elimination of those programs, in speeches, news interviews, and written proposals.
It amazes me how some folks drum up their own morality while toting their ill-gotten gains to the bank. Looking at you, Rick Scott, TFG, the flying monkeys of the House of Representatives, et al. As an acquaintance once said, "When someone tells me they are a Christian businessman, I hold onto my wallet and run." From Rupert Murdoch to Putin to the Christian Nationalists, when will they see that, despite calling us socialists and worse, they delude themselves most of all.
That is an extreme position that aborts communication. On this planet there are businesses that embrace the Christian model that has not wandered too far from the “love thy neighbor...” thing. But news outlets don’t cover this.
Nor do I see cable news pundits discussing how trends in the Republican Party parallel the rise of Nazism.
I assure you it only seems extreme to those who worry their contact could evoke that response in others. To the rest of us, such feelings reflect generations of experience and millenia of history.
I do not patronize any business because of their religious views, but I do avoid many because of their sanctimonious proselytizing. It's disgusting.
Nor do I see any religious organizations denouncing the extreme right, instead just enjoying the ride on their coattails.
As Sam Smith points out so eloquently, it is the concentric circles of decreasing reason of "good" religious people by degree that ultimately makes the completely psycho religious people possible.
I see religious people rejecting hate and greed and counseling social awareness and compassion, as MLK did, but am disappointed that as a whole, there is so little visible "religious" protest (that I am aware of) of the cruel and narcissistic values of so many who claim to speak for their religion. I am not religious in any conventional sense, but I very much respect the values of some who are. Actions speak louder than words.
Your comment reminds me of the not-so-distant past, May of 2022, the Southern Baptist Convention published a list of hundreds of men in power positions who have been accused of sexual abuse. What happened to this list of hundreds? I'd like to know - the rats.
Thinking today of Jimmy Carter, a religious man who has lived his principles. In addition, he put solar panels on the White House (which Ronald Reagan, who used tricks to get himself elected) took off.
Many religious leaders in Portland were behind Measure 114, the gun law that voters passed here in Oregon and is currently being held up by a judge in eastern Oregon. The Oregon Supreme Court has declined to interfere until that plays out in that court.
They are also discriminatory and help finance a lot of intolerance. We have several places here in Salem where we will not darken the door that are local, but have made their pseudo-Christianity well known. One couple owns a couple restaurants and bragged about conning someone who asked if they had been vaccinated and they said yes because sometime as children they were for the usual things. They thought they were too clever by half. Liars and hypocrites.
Pamela, I refuse to step foot into a Hobby Lobby, too. The one near me went out of business, and I was thrilled. Did you know that they purchased plundered antiquities (from Iraq?), knowing their origins, and imported them to this country by describing them as "tiles"? I'm fuzzy about the details, but think they had to surrender them and pay restitution. In my opinion, they should have been forbidden to conduct business as a penalty. Oh, and then there's their refusal to pay for employee insurance that would have covered birth control.
I agree that religious institutions rarely remind the public of the core of Christianity which is to love in the ways suggested in biblical texts.
I also think that theocracies generally are oppressive.
I personally have the good fortune to be part of a local church that very much embraces the core values I mentioned above.
Me, I love the art of argument but I have found that persuasion is better. To further that shift I have to be better at first finding common ground, find a way to validate the other person, walk alongside rather than go nose to nose trading glares.
Thank you, though your comment about peace reminded me of a particularly egregious saying - "Know Jesus, Know Peace, No Jesus, No Peace" which appears to be more of an action plan. I have yet to meet any religious person who demonstrated any moral advantage over any good person of no religious indoctrination. Consider that religious beliefs are essentially determined completely by where we are born and little else. Every Christian I know (I grew up evangelical) would adamantly deny they could be Hindu or Muslim if simply born in a different part of the world, but will confidently say Hindu and Muslim peoples are "lost." Lol.
The (over)focus on white evangelical Christians does tend to obscure the truth that what makes the right-wing (white-wing?) movement so awful is not unique to evangelicals, or Christians, or religious people in general. Authoritarian movements appear not only in religions but in secular ideologies (Nazism and Stalinism for starters), and often when they arise they have widespread popular appeal.
Religious authoritarians have a head start because they can claim that their ideologies are underwritten by God. Secular authoritarians may adopt a religious veneer ("Kinder, Küche, Kirche") but they often turn into personality cults where a man (almost invariably it is a man) stands in for the deity.
I'm fascinated (as well as somewhat terrified) by the apotheosis of Donald Trump. On so many counts he's the antithesis of what the white-wing evangelicals claim to value and believe. I'm daring to believe that he's the fault line, the (I hope) fatal flaw in this home-grown fascist movement -- the fracturing of the GOP as we head toward 2024 suggests as much. But a whirlwind has been unleashed, and it's a long way from behing tamed.
John, you now can edit on Substack! Click on the three dots (…) at the end of the line below your comment and voilà: those pesky typos can be fixed anon 😁
Here is a link to a talk in Minneapolis in January 2023 by Dr. Michael Emerson on his research that looks at the beliefs of Practicing White Christians (PWC). They are people who say they are Christian, who say their faith is extremely important to them, and they attend worship at least once per month. Emerson is a sociologist at Univ. of North Carolina. His book on this research is "The Grand Betrayal: The Agonizing Story of Religion, Race, and Rejection in American Life." His lecture starts at about minute 37. This was sponsored by the Minnesota Council of Churches, and the news of his survey findings is spreading. In essence, PWCs interpret biblical passages in ways that are incongruous with the meaning of biblical faith which teaches, among other things, that we should care for the foreigner, confess our own sin, etc. There is much more here: https://youtu.be/KtnmxSYH_vM
Shall look. Your American “Christianity” makes me keep a bucket near by. Emerson probably travels with a bucket handy. And the term practising white Christian’s is as much an oxymoron as … you think it up.
The problematic word in PWC is "white" because it is the group of white people in the survey (among all Christians) who registered the most positive emotions about White Privilege and the most negative emotions around Social Justice, Reparations, Undocumented Immigrants. These views are found across the board among Roman Catholics, mainline Protestants, and evangelicals who are white. So what's disturbing, Anne, is that PWCs are not only the evangelical conservative MAGAs we might think. And the bucket-worthy survey results are not explained by political party affiliation, age, residence, gender, etc. It's just about being white.
Mary, when you are presented with a "Christian religious man" who tells everyone around him that gayfolk are an abomination of God, please tell me why John's quote of Nietzsche "is an extreme position that aborts communication". Please tell me how that is different from people who tell me they "hate the sin but love the sinner". How does one "communicate" with someone who believes they are an abomination and a sinner because of what some "god" said?
I agree that that is a problem and that quote has been used to justify oppression, hatred and violence. But I believe that that problem does not nullify all of Christian scripture. If I ever converse with someone who clutches that problem to his or her breast I would still try to talk about it to
My first reaction to this quote was to chuckle and agree. Because the damage done by "religions" is arguably much greater than the good they are supposed to represent. Many of today's Bible Thumpers are terrifyingly dangerous.
But then I remind myself that as soon as we make sweeping generalizations about any group of people (except Trumpers and Nazis, etc.) we have demonstrated ignorance.
I don't have a religious bone in my body. I would tax every "church". I think that most megachurch preachers are as trustworthy as George Santos. I think it would be appropriate for the Roman Catholic church to declare itself an enemy of mankind and sell its assets to feed the poor. The Russian Orthodox version should be sent to the gulags for supporting Putin the monster. I could go on....
However, I know many people who consider themselves religious who are exemplary human beings. The fact that they have another take on faith just means they have another opinion. I still honor them for the complete humans they are - despite believing that their "faiths" are silly superstitions. I work with what people do. How do they treat others? That is all that matters to me.
That being said, the religious people who are well intentioned - accepting of all people regardless of faith or lack thereof, regardless of gender identity, color, cultural background or political views - those people, that you and I might get along with, have been way too silent. An exception, whose following I hope is growing, is John Pavlovitz. https://johnpavlovitz.com/
You will find some mighty fine people in this comments forum who are on the correct side of democracy, diversity, social justice and all around fairness. And many of them have some sort of religious faith. One is a "chaplain". I stand with them because we share core values about how we should treat people.
Love John. But, about half way into the trump years I had to stop reading his work. I had really started to despise trump voters. So now I read him periodically. He's a really good man!
My Jewish wife and I toured parts of Italy. Every city or large town had a duomo. Painted on the interiors were scenes of torture. People being speared, roasted and dismembered. Except for the duomo in Assisi. My wife said: "I like this guy Francis. "Franny" can be my saint". She is an animal lover, so that helped, as well.
He could be a secular saint. He sort of bucked the Catholic Church and came close to heresy. He would be forgotten today if killed by the Inquisition for heresy, but prevailed and became the gentle Saint, embraced by animal lovers and non-religious seekers.
My partner and I took off on our pilgrimage on October 4, 1975 and learned later that was the Feast of St. Francis. Synchronicity?
"...the religious people who are well intentioned ... have been way too silent."
I disagree, emphatically. They are not so much silent as unheard: ignored as not relevant and thus not quoted. That's on us, buried in our own silo that divides people into handy representational categories. Not all religious people carry a flag that says so. Maybe we need to open ourselves up to be receptive.
It's true that they don't make the headlines because they aren't outrageous. You are right. It's on us to listen. I'll work harder on that.
But to break through in this world, we need to do something attention grabbing. Maybe a big electric F-150 pickup with a flag of Jesus (black version, of course) with the words "Proud Democrat"?
We just have to get out of our own silos and pay attention to what is really going on instead of just assuming we already know. Not sure flying a flag is going to help out a lot with that. It's still letting the extremists set the standard. Let's face the other way and pay closer attention to who else is working with us that we are too blind to see. Or hear.
I've toyed with the idea of flying the National Colors and the Pride flag from my half-ton pickup (sadly, not electric). But I'm not sure how safe I'd be.
Although I belong to a different Faith, "Faithful America" is a wonderful group of Christians who are fighting peacefully and having an affect, against Christian Nationalist. They are against the extremist who have twisted the teachings of Christ. Please check them out, they need support. I'm sadly not tech savvy to put a link.
David, I was about to say that, too. You and Hope beat me to it. I've always known that I was in good company here in Heather's Herd, and that belief has been reinforced.
The good news, to me, is that these insane bigots on the extreme right are finally spelling out their plans in public. I hope that we won't be disappointed at the reaction of every sane person in this country.
Nancy, My guess is that we won’t be disappointed, presuming we respond proactively. To clarify, in my view, the outcome of future elections could land primarily on how effectively Biden and Democratic leadership manage the upheaval much of the GOP feasts on. Democrats need to lead in this moment when GOP far-right extremists are fueling hate and division. They have to go where the trouble is in this country, the trouble the GOP extremists are stoking, the trouble said extremists are making worse. Democrats must go there and meet with the people who doubt that Democrats care about the wreckage of their dreams and show they can work on legitimate issues and grievances.
I agree, Barbara Jo. I don't understand why so many people don't already know the valuable things that Biden has accomplished, and my guess is that it is due to the fact that Biden is not a charismatic speaker. His life-long speech impediment has hampered his ability to get past many peoples' affinity for style above substance.
Nancy, While I mostly agree with your thoughts about Biden, please note that when I wrote, “They [Dems] have to go where the trouble is…” I was speaking about our local, state, and federal representatives. Moreover, I wasn’t expecting these officials merely to enumerate the accomplishments of the past two years, which, compliments of Manchin and Sinema, were dramatically edited down. Instead, I expect Democrats authentically to empathize with legitimate grievances and inequities and to demonstrate their commitment to implementing meaningful change.
Yes, Barbara Jo, local politics is essential to any real progress. I agree, too, that the Democrats need to listen and help everyone who's aggrieved and hurting.
Jeri, While I don’t disagree with your assessment of much of MSM and have served as a lay media critic for some time, I also believe in pressing our Democratic representatives to do a better job of messaging both their agenda and the harms and injustices each time it is blocked.
“Half of republicans” (supporting “Christian” nationalism) is indeed a lot of people, but what proportion of the total voting population is that now - 20%,25%?
This line bothered me too. Per 2022 Gallup polls of party affiliation, ~28% identify as Republicans; 30% as Dem, 40% Independent. MSM routinely disingenuously frames Dem/Repub split like it is 50-50. The article that HCR referenced says "According to the PRRI/Brookings study, only 10% of Americans view themselves as adherents of Christian nationalism and about 19% of Americans said they sympathize with these views."
Those numbers are still very concerning and require that we all draw attention to this dangerous threat in our society with friends and via any platform we have because 81% of Americans are NOT among the crazies.
Yes, it’s still a lot of people And important to try to counteract. Thanks for calling attention to the reference, I hadn’t checked. Who knew Marjorie Taylor Greene was a Christian, though? Not real noticeable, imho.
We have a particularly sleazy developer right here in River City (Salem, OR) that touts his Christianity. My neighbor, when she finds out someone is a fundamentalist, says watch your back. Yes, run, don't walk. I also reminded of another person, neighbor of my in-laws who made much of his Christianity. And he called us at night to ask my husband, who worked at Employment, to somehow make things work for him. My husband refused. Then later one, he commented to me at a party at my in-laws that the neighborhood had changed, meaning that it was no longer lily white. I just smiled and said yes, it is more diverse. This turkey and all the others have no idea of who Jesus was or what he said in the first three Gospels.
Oregon is a weird critter when it comes to its attitude regarding anyone not white. We removed racist language from our constitution in 2002 and repealed the section of our constitution that permitted slavery or involuntary servitude as punishment for a crime just this last year. There were "sundown towns" in Oregon as late as the 1960's. Our racist roots run deep and no "whitewashing" will change that.
With that in mind, larger metropolitan areas are better than smaller towns, but there is still awful discrimination and harassment that goes on for BIPOC. I have become friendly with women who run two restaurants in town (one Vietnamese and one Chinese) and both have had their businesses targeted for vandalism in the past several years. A big problem in Eugene in particular is that the global "we" (of liberal white folks) think we are more racially equitable than we really are, which isn't very...
This is interesting. I'm sure glad I don't run into people like this in Massachusetts. I'm a bit disappointed in Oregon, which was the third state I was ever in. (My parents had friends outside of Portland, and we'd drive from Seattle.)
I am always amazed at what people will say when they think they are talking to someone who is as prejudiced as they are. My husband has Lakota ancestry, for example, but a lot of people don't know that. I made up my mind about racism when I was about seven and have not changed since although I had and still have a lot to learn. I did spend three and half years in Sierra Leone (student at Fourah Bay and Peace Corps) and when I came back, I have to say people here looked very pale and not quite healthy. We also have people here in Salem who keep track of the efforts of the fundamentalists and often video what they see....yes, taking a risk. Now we have a bill in the legislature that will make it very difficult for militias like the Proud Boys to harass and intimidate. The gun nuts oppose it, but I do hope it passes.
David, having been born and raised in the Boston suburbs, my experience was that there was plenty of similar conduct there. Evangelicals weren't prevalent, but I had many neighbor children tell me that I was going to hell because I was of a different Christian denomination than they were, and one schoolteacher informed the school principal when he referred to me as "little Irish eyes" that I was no such thing, as someone in my family was a "fence-jumper," as I attended the Episcopal church. Evangelical bigotry and hypocrisy in Georgia takes on a different tone, but all of it has the same basis, and none of it bears any resemblance to the spirit of Christianity.
By the way, one child who predicted that my fate would be hellfire ended up being a huge fan of tFg. Surprised?
My Dad's father was Jewish, his mother Catholic. Very Catholic. IRISH Catholic. So the kids could do Hannukah but would go to Bible study. Fair enough.
Dad recently told me that one day some nun in Sunday school was going on about how non-believers are never saved. He went home a bit upset, related it to my Nana, and asked, "but what about Daddy?" Nana got the sternest look he'd ever seen, and simply, flatly stated, "ALL GOOD people go to Heaven."
As a "non-Catholic" 4th grader in parochial school, the nun proclaimed that my deceased father's soul was likely not to have made it to heaven. I subsequently stayed home because had a stomach ache for 3 days. My mother, who rarely took my side, eventually called the nun and said something like "just give her an education and leave out the editorial stuff".
This began my long love - hate relationship with religion. (I still love the teachings about love.)
It is amazing to me that anyone could actually purport to know, with any certainty, what God would want, what God decides, or even what God looks like. I myself don't believe in God per se, but neither do I disbelieve, because how could any human ever know for sure. Anyone who purports to know these details just strikes me as wanting to, you know... play God.
From the Crusades, to torturing thinkers like Galileo during the inquisition to "re-educating" indigenous children and ruining their lives, the Church has a lot to answer for, as do many organized religions. Even today, many forbid birth control (a la Justices Thomas and Alito) so that there will be more contributors when the offering plate is passed. Like you, I believe in being kind and contributing to the welfare of all, but I gave up on organized religion (even the moderate Episcopal church) years ago.
Not surprised by that last sentence. I missed most of the hellfire and damnation, probably partly as a result of going to a Quaker elementary school, and living in a housing development full of professors and similar. Oddly, my best friend in second grade, though Jewish, had had a friend before we met who was hellfire and damnation Christian. So, for example, my best friend got me to go to Saturday school with him, by saying, "It might make the difference between whether you're up there with those angels or down there with those devils." I was surprised when I went to Saturday school with him that there was no mention of hellfire and damnation, not even a hint of it. It was just a pleasant small group, coloring, and hearing some judaism related stories.
After second grade, we moved away, and I didn't see this guy again until I looked him up after graduating from college. He had only the vaguest memory of me, (oh, wait, he said, after five minutes of my explaining who I was and how we'd done everything together in secoind grade, "did your family live at the top of the hill and have an orange station wagon?" (That was indeed us.) And he had no recollectoin of the hellfire and damnation, and as far as I could tell he wasn't religious.
Where you lived and went to school was definitely a factor. For years, I thought that if we'd lived in the Back Bay or a similar area my experience would have been much different. As a young teen, I had many Jewish friends, and there was none of the hellfire and damnation conversation common with my Catholic (mostly Irish) friends. Much better that your long-ago friend recalled your family's orange station wagon rather than any hellfire and damnation. I'm also impressed with his second grade understanding of the choice of "up there with those angels or down there with those devils."
I must confess that despite my "friend" warning me of my destiny to burn in hell, I asked my parents if I could go to parochial school. I wasn't worried (just insulted) about the hell prediction, but "sister" school had the advantage (to me) of a later start to the school year in the Fall, an earlier end in Spring, lots of holy days off during the year, and I was fascinated by the nuns' garb - especially the veils. The downside was that nuns had the reputation of smacking your knuckles with a ruler for infractions, but I believed that my good behavior and good grades would probably exempt me from punishment. Fortunately, my mother and father (who left the Catholic church as a teenager, thus the "fence jumper" described by my 5th grade teacher) weren't having any of my pleas of attending parochial school, so I continued in the more rigorous public school system.
I was a bit surprised that Ralphie didn't remember that the station wagon was a '57 Chevy. Ralphie forgot stuff because his father had died when he was six, I think. He never talked to me about that, but my mother did. Ralphie's father had had two heart attacks, and at some point he told my mother, "my father was lucky the first time." (And my mother told me--she thought, probably rightly, that that statement was very signficant.)
Ralphie's mother was a noted interior decorator in Seattle, did work for John Ehrlichman, among others, and drove a Thunderbird. His grandfather had been a founder of Nordstrom's (this was Seattle), and Ralphie was an incredibly precocious kid. One weekend day, we were hanging around where there were swings and such, and some Black girls were there, too (this was academic year 1960-61). I referred to them as negroes, and Ralphie said, "don't call them that. It's not nice." One of them responded, "but that's what we are". He also married a woman he met in college, and they're almost certainly still married.
I don't know when Ralphie gave up the hellfire and damnation, but I'm sure he had totally forgotten about it by the time we met after college.
I live in "MetroWest". But I spent my first 50 years in Western Mass. It was a great place to grow up. A lot more space. More of the "natural world". But there are patches of scary people out there. More than a few big pickups with huge American flags and Trump stickers. Pockets of hate. I feel much safer here.
Oy. Funny, my best friend lives outside Albany NY, and I now take the back roads when I visit him and his SO, meaning Rt. 2 all the way to Williamstown and then either 2 to Albany or a couple of way-back roads through Powlan VT (the extreme southwest corner of that state) and then up to 7 in NY, which goes almost all the way to my friend's--and no trumpiness--and least none that I've seen. I HAVE seen a bit of trumpiness when taking other backroads, which I've occasionally done.
People think “Portland” when they hear of Oregon....there is SO much more out there, of the right-wing extremist variety. Same as CA, where I am from originally...again, it’s not all SF and LA...very red areas. And now we live in AZ!🤪
" As an acquaintance once said, "When someone tells me they are a Christian businessman, I hold onto my wallet and run."
While I was still in junior high, I figured out that the guys who bragged the loudest about their "conquests" were the guys who couldn't get a date if they had Cyrano de Bergerac writing their material.
Same with the folks who find it necessary to tout their "Christianity" with bells, whistles, banners and horns. They apparently missed this admonition in Matthew 6:5-6:
"“And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. 6 But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you."
Because to them, it's the appearance that matters, not the substance.
In 2010, as a retired engineer with more than 30 years in heavy industry I volunteered as the "owners representative" to head up a major addition to our Episcopal church. At that point I had lots of experience with contractors both great and crooked and in between. I was working with another engineer who had been in technical sales representing the church, and we were meeting with various contractors. We sat down with one contractor, in his conference room and the first thing he had to do was open the meeting with prayer. We were not there to pray, we were there to talk about technical details and cost. This was our last meeting with this contractor.
We found another contractor from about 60 miles away who was outstanding. These were tough times for the building trades but the measure of the great contractor was how he treated his people not the show he put on.
By the way that "praying" contractor got caught praying on customers and went bankrupt.
Another sign to make you run away - a large pickup truck in the south with a Christian fish emblem stuck on the tailgate, and a confederate flag bolted onto the front bumper. Saw one yesterday.
Religion is and always has been about power. Dostoevsky's Grand Inquisitor said it perfectly. “There exists no greater or more painful anxiety for a man who has freed himself from all religious bias, than how he shall soonest find a new object or idea to worship. But man seeks to bow before that only which is recognized by the greater majority, if not by all his fellow-men, as having a right to be worshipped; whose rights are so unquestionable that men agree unanimously to bow down to it. For the chief concern of these miserable creatures is not to find and worship the idol of their own choice, but to discover that which all others will believe in, and consent to bow down to in a mass.”
Thanks, Nancy. That is exactly where I got the image. I couldn't recall what they were called. "Harpies" I think. But Harpies are a different creature all together.
Hope I was so gobsmacked by your ‘flying monkeys’ imagery that I couldn’t immediately baboonsil my way through the remainder of your spot-on commentary.
Hope From the Wizard of Oz I realized that balloons had a will of their own. At 11 I had a Coke with Frank Morgan on his yacht. To me he didn’t seem to be a malevolent balloonist.
I can’t say the same about Xi and/or his military sycophants with their ‘intelligence balloons.’
"Their own morality", as you so aptly put it, seems to be the result of way too little time reading history. As in, when the Pope owned the world, Church of England, & on & on...
From R. Scott via HCR; " But it also reflected the turn toward Christian nationalism, centering Christianity and “Judeo-Christian values” by investing in religious schools, adoption agencies, and social services and calling for an end to abortion, gender-affirming care, and diversity training. It explicitly puts religion above the law, saying “Americans will not be required to go against their core values and beliefs in order to conform to culture or government.”
Seems to me that Christian belief is centered on the concept of 'one true God', which is a faith based (and unprovable by mere humans) notion. It's a good thing in context. Except the Repubs want to put the unprovable above the law. Then, only the "leaders"will be able to make policy. Only they will be able to fix it. The religious texts of the leaders' choice will become scripture. And then, the Repubs will finally get their cummuppance.
Dan I believe that religion is a matter of personal faith. It can neither be proved or disproved by ‘facts.’ For ‘Christians,’ presumably they believe in the teachings of Jesus: love, forgiveness, and turn the other cheek. (Also that a rich man has a very slim chance of going to heaven.)
If they reject this, then I do not consider them ‘Christians.’
Each religion has its own name for 'God'. Jesus, Jehovah, Buddha, whatever. The thing religions forget is that all of these represent pure LOVE. They need to focus on that rather than their rules and man-made commandments that are the cause of so much hate and war.
Debbie Before humans ‘formalized’ religion, ‘God’ was acknowledged in agriculture, the sun, water, and in ‘birth mothers.’ Only around 3,000 BCE do we start finding historical evidence of formal religion—often linked to political power [Egypt, Ur].
Some modern religions have a diversity of ‘Gods.’ In Judaism, the diversity of ‘Gods’ was reduced to one god about 700 BCE. In Christianity there was focus on Jesus being the ‘son of God.’ While Jesus symbolized love, this was not my impression of the ‘God’ of the Old Testament.
I guess my point is that virtually every religion depicts its 'God' as love. Yet they get all tangled up in their rules and exceptions to who is worthy of love and who we should hate because they don't follow our particular set of rules, etc., etc., etc., that 'love' is hardly visible.
"Your letter brings home once again how vital it is that we push back and hold at bay the Christo-fascists!"
Maybe.
But, the train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, was not caused by Christo-fascists. It was caused by the degradation of Obama era regulations on train safety that were removed during the Trump administration through effective "lobbying" accepted by non-Christo-fascists in Congress and by Norfolk Southern management's willingness to prioritize profit over all aspects of train transport.
In other words: The real threat in America is:
A Governmental model in this country that looks more like Prostitution than Democracy.
In short: I will call the governmental model in the US: Democratic Prostitution.
Those two words MOST accurately reflect the government model actually in use in the United States of America.
And, the current drumbeat from Fox News focusing NOT on the causes of the train derailment itself but on the EPA response? Nobody at Fox News is a Christo-fascist.
But everyone at FOX IS a Capitalist extremist and in full support of purchasing as many politicians as possible (lobbying) to get them to do their bidding. There it is again: Democratic Prostitution.
Likewise. Drug prices are not astronomical because of Christo-fascists.
Drug prices are high, and hospital stays are (now) profoundly expensive because Pharmaceutical companies prioritize profit over all aspects of health care and hospitals are now all owned mostly by hedge funds that also prioritize profit over the health of anyone at all.
And? The reason the two above facts exist is because of effective lobbying in Congress by Capitalist extremists who prefer a governmental model that looks more like prostitution than democracy. Democratic Prostitution again is the model for government here.
So, I would like to introduce what everyone already knows: Religious extremism is particularly easy to demonize because it is real, and, yes, some rich folks want private schools (mostly so that they don't have to go to integrated schools with black folks honestly).
BUT, the real problem in America is Capitalist Extremism that has led to a Governmental Model called: Democratic Prostitution.
Democratic Prostitution NOT Christian extremism/Christo-fascism is the threat we face most.
I rush to say: Sometimes, and more frequently of late, Capitalist Extremism in the form of Democratic Prostitution and Christo-fascist rhetoric overlap, in particular, with junk Christianity called "Prosperity Gospel".
Fox “News” may not believe a word they speak, they may be doing it all for money, but they are in fact promoting the self-called-Christian authoritarians. Mussolini, who knew fascism, once said it should have been called corporatism. So it’s both. My only problem with your snappy label, is that in today’s environment too many will think it describes Democrats and not Republicans.
Interesting take on Democratic Prostitution. Prostitutes need money to live on. Without the insane political system where politicians can't run a campaign without a ton of money, which make them beholding to their donors. It is impossible to see a problem where money is not at the root. (of all evil). A healthcare industry that is profit motivated is nuts. There is nothing wrong with lobbying the government. The problem is when big $ wants something from the government they have politicians who NEED their $. Public financing and eliminate large donations might help. If running for office did not require large sums of money thing might look differently.
But since when is health care an “industry”? Has the Hippocratic Oath lost all meaning? Isn’t it time that we have free medical schools for qualified applicants? And maybe it’s also time to outlaw hedge funds which are causing so much damage to so many while contributing nothing of which I am aware. (Someone can correct me on that?)
Agree. Except healthcare in America did become an industry in America when, in the 1930's, private physicians invented illness insurance so they could be paid more than a sack of potatoes and a chicken for their services. And hospitals and nursing homes, many started by well intentioned physicians and nuns, became more capitalistic toys for hedge funders like Mitt Romney who squeezed out any extra funds (I won't say "profits" because most are non-profits), and regular revenues, firing "excess" employees, requiring remaining ones to do overtime to make up the difference this hustle created. Yes, there should be a law - MANY EFFECTIVE LAWS AGAINST THIS THIEVERY:
Couldn’t agree more. Who is really happy that we want to help Ukraine? The corporations that will rake in billions in war profits. They are the ones in the rooms where decisions are made. Who was just happy to have a pandemic for a few years? The profiteers who were in the rooms where the decisions were made (under both Republican and Democratic administrations). Make America really great again-especially if it’s manufactured overseas for more profit.
Well, that might be part of it (the ill-gotten gains of the military-industrial complex), but as a Latvian I also know that this *is* about a rules-based international order. I was angry at Obama regarding his response to Crimea and predicted the war in Ukraine. Moldova, Poland and the Baltics will be next. Putin has never been shy about his obsession with restoring the USSR. Of course, this will lead us into WW3; we - and our allies - need to control Putin’s aggression or we are REALLY in danger.
I am really happy that we want to help Ukraine even with the war profits, of which I am very much aware. Helping Ukraine is helping Europe, our first western cultural center, and helping US keep democracy alive.
Why do you call it Democratic prostitution when it is the Republican side of the aisle that set up the flood of corporate money corrupting our elections? I saw a bumper sticker the other day that said,”In America , it’s lobbying. In the rest of the world, it is graft and corruption.” Corporations can no longer give legislators dinners, and cigars. But they can give them as much unidentified campaign money as they want. This happened when John Roberts agreed to make it the law of the land that a corporate entity was a person, right? What do you think would be the best way to stop the flood of anonymous money into campaign coffers at all levels of government, which is the only way I can see to push the “playing field back toward some semblance of level”?
Ideally, pass Adam Schiff's proposed Constitutional Amendment to repeal the Citizens United decision. Since that's not happening in my lifetime, support Senator Whitehouse's DISCLOSE bill that would put some daylight onto the 'dark money' being poured into campaigns.
Mike S. I mostly agree, but do not underestimate the power of the Christo-fascists. Their numbers are growing with the aid of Mike Flynn, and their fanaticism is strong.
You are right to use the term Christofascists, a term I first heard Carolyn Baker use. It encompasses the reality of authoritarian white male control over other beliefs, basically. Can anyone doubt its inherent values of racism, sexism, homophobia, anti-semitism, deliberate ignorance, and greed? Nevertheless, it's a loaded term that folks aren't quite ready to contemplate. But go for it, Jane! It certainly fits.
I first used the term "Christofascists" a few years back while arguing with my MAGAt cousin. It really made her angry, but because she was a Texan, "Y'all Qaeda" made her even angrier.
It makes me kind of sad now, because she was one of the Covid casualties last year (she got sick at the end of 2021) and we used to be close. But I still think the terms were kind of appropriate in the context of our conversation, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
I'm sorry that your cousin passed from Covid, Karen. Was she a no vaxer? If so, that is one among many reasons the MAGAs pursue their mad goals while causing their own demise (literally!)
I suspect that she was a no-vaxxer. She and I had had a falling out over tfg, and I didn't even realize that she had died until I happened to look at her Facebook page just before what would have been her 81st birthday last May. I only found out the tiny bit I did by messaging her daughter.
It's very sad. And I blame that selfish orange narcissistic asshole. Covid never should have been politicized in any way.
Oh my, that is so sad. I hope you are okay. Yes, I too blame tfg for the million plus deaths under his watch. I too have learned of deaths by Facebook. It feels bizarre, frankly.
Wow. What a Letter, Professor Richardson. I am reeling from the implications. The extremist wing of the Republican Party is at its inflection point and is now quite dangerous.
I’d like to take Senator Voldemort, while at his helm as governor of Florida caused suffering amongst human beings, straight to the woodshed and throttle him. And then follow with DeSantis. Florida has become a stain on the map of the UNITED States of America. How dare they become a blatant autocratic warship. They can go f*ck themselves and their white, racist agenda of christian nationalism. There is nothing of ethical and human value within its rotten framework.
Thank you for your Letters from an American. I know where truth shines.
Christian nationalists like to refer to “Judeo-Christian values” and I am taking this opportunity to tell you how angry I feel whenever I see this term used! Most Jews do not - and I emphasize not - connect ourselves to “Judeo-Christian values."
I think that term may have been used as an effort to show that Christianity was a natural outgrowth of Judaism and had led to it. Although there are values that both religions share, Judaism is a distinct and separate religion.
Our views about abortion, separation of church and state, rights of LGBTQ+ members of society etc. differ from those of Christian nationalists and many fundamental Christian sects.
I'll be curious if anyone else shares my views and concerns.
I am not Jewish, but I agree with both your views and your concerns. They have no idea of what they are talking about. I also do not want to live in a theocracy.
Yes, for example, it is my understanding in Jewish law the life of the existing human, the woman, takes priority over the life of the potential human being, the fetus. The extreme anti-abortion laws of the Christian Nationalists put the life of the fetus over the right to life of the mother in all cases. I suppose that is because half of the fetuses are male.
What I've read recently is that, according to Jewish law (it could just be tradition, and not law since that's not my area of expertise) until the first breath is drawn, a fetus is not considered to be a human being.
That used to be the Christian notion as well. It has been politicized. And here's to Fr. Robert Drinan, a pro life Catholic priest, who was my representative to the House for a good while. RIP.
Mina, I was raised by a Jewish mother, first generation from Eastern Europe, and a very lapsed Irish Catholic father. They were both true “Christians” in all the best senses of the word. I love both cultures and I am grateful I had so much richness in my life because of that. But I couldn’t agree more with you about the term “Jude’s-Christian values”. Always made my skin I crawl....
How wonderful that you had such amazing parents. I've been blessed to have friends who were born as Christians and live their Christianity every day. We share the same values and show great respect for each other's religion.
It's not the same at all. Messianic Jews are a weird in-between sect that believes Jesus was the prophet as described in the Old Testament, and therefore believe in Jesus as savior but lean more heavily on Old Testament/Torah teachings than other Christians. They consider themselves Jews, but actual Jews consider them Christians. Caveat: I'm very far from an expert, and needed to Wikipedia it to refresh myself. As folks above have pointed out, Judeo-Christian is a term with origin in American politics, intended to invoke an unified American society, originally to contrast with Communism. (Funny how the other Abrahamic religion - Islam - is conspicuously absent from this grouping.)
*Sigh* Essentially, religion is a human creation and just a mirror for all of human society. Good people do good with it, bad people do bad with it, and folks get caught up on weird details that don't actually matter. Yadda yadda yadda.
No, it's not the same - just look it up - you'll find plenty of simple explanations on line. Gayle, this is a private matter! Nobody can force a belief system on you. It's just "thanks but no thanks", end of story. Just enjoy being a truthful agnostic! I was an obedient little churchgoer until I was about 14 and they were starting to pressure me into making declarations and I realised that I couldn't. It just wasn't true. I didn't believe.
Hi Gayle -- Will and Anne-Louise have already given brief explanations, but the Wikipedia references will give you more information that I can squeeze into this response.
"Messianic Judaism is a modernist and syncretic movement of Protestant Christianity that incorporates some elements of Judaism and other Jewish traditions into evangelicalism." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messianic_Judaism)
A final difference. Messianic Judaism incorporates so many Christian beliefs that it is not at all Judaism. And like many Christian denominations (not all), Messianic Judaism proselytizes to get new converts, whereas Judaism does not.
“But the United States has traditionally backed democracies against autocracies. Today in Munich, Vice President Kamala Harris talked of the war crimes and atrocities the Russians have committed in Ukraine and said: ‘We have examined the evidence, we know the legal standards, and there is no doubt: These are crimes against humanity.’”
Yes, they are crimes against humanity, and Putin must be stopped!!!
The United States has NOT traditionally supported democracies over autocracies. Look at the incalculable damage it has done in Latin America by overthrowing legitimately elected governments which were perceived to be left-leaning or socialist.
The only relatively acknowledged US organized coup over a democratically elected, secular government in Iran degenerated into the oppressive theocracy we see today.
The coup that brought the Shah into power, basically backed by big Oil interests in the US and CIA (Moussadeq who was overthrown wanted to nationalize the oil fields), was in 1953.
The Shah was overthrown in 1979--remember Carter lost, partly due to the hostage crisis in Tehran? The Shah was a brutal dictator, his regime tortured many people and initially, it was a nationalistic movement that finally managed to gather enough strength to lash back and get rid of him--which got taken over by the extreme Mullahs.
As we watch Carter in hospice now, never forget that Reagan sent envoys behind the scenes to slow down negotiations, promising $$ to these Mullahs, so Carter couldn't claim the 'win' of bringing home the hostages--the hostages were released the moment Reagan placed his hand on the bible to swear an oath to protect our Constitution. Outright treason that may have also tipped the balance against Democratic forces that were still nascent in Iran at the time, because Reagan and his Oil buddies continued to reward the Mullahs handsomely.
Anyone visiting Iran in the 70s would never have believed by 1980 the cosmopolitan, sophisticated (almost European) Iranian elite would be under the thumb of religious police. Their sophistication was unmatched at the time in the region.
A long and complicated history. Yes, CIA did a lot of damage by picking dictators through the 60s. But there were a lot of other currents and undertows involved in that disaster.
Talia You are correct that America’s ‘democratic principles’ abroad in recent generations have not reflected our self-proclaimed ‘exception is.’ We should and can do better. As I reflect on the Soviet Union, Putin’s Russia, Western colonialism, African fragmentation, and much more, I suggest that ‘he who is without sin cast the first stone.’
Not just recent generations but from the beginning of our history, the tension between supporting democratic principles and colonialism usually leaned towards colonialism. How we got Texas, the southwest (Mexican War), our treatment of the Philippines, Viet Nam, S. America, etc. What we couldn't buy, we just annexed.
Dot Like the British did before us—and the Roman Empire much earlier. I guess that Switzerland wasn’t ‘expansionist,’ though I’m not sure how the diverse cantons were assembled.
And the Greeks before Rome. I read a comment once about Christianity being a cult that killed off the old Greek and Roman religions. It gave me a whole new perspective on the Christian in Judaeo-Christian.
Dot Oh those crafty Athenians. They turned the Delian League into their own imperial club and shot daggers at the Spartans.
As for the Crusaders, their activities often were ‘non-Christian,’ while Saladin conducted himself with honor. Were the Crusaders fore-bearers of today’s Evangelical Christinas?
Like with everything else the US always supported what was in the interest of the US. That's every country's right - one should just always keep it in mind. Sometimes that interest just matches what the majority of the population of the other country wants.
That's not entirely true. The US government has always supported what was in the interest of the corporations that support the politicians who run the government. It was not in the US interest to interfere in the Middle East. For example, it was not in our long term interest to interfere with Iran in 1953, but British Petroleum took issue with democratically elected Mohammed Mossedegh nationalizing the oil business in Iran so they could build schools, hospitals, etc., so the CIA overthrew him, reinstalled the Shah, trained his secret police, SAVAK, and started the reign of terror that ended up with the Islamic revolution in 1979, which inspired us to back Saddam Hussein next door and you all know the rest. We are still dealing with the fallout from that. If we had supported democracy instead of a foreign oil business, the Middle East could have become a region of democracy instead of the mess it is now. Same with Central America. Why do we have so many people seeking asylum here? Because of our long term policy of destabilization in the region which has ended up with people fleeing failed states. All in the interest of private companies. Read Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein. It's a good description of our mid to later 20th century policies and how they have wreaked global havoc, all underpinned by conservative philosophies of people like Milton Friedman. The interests of the people of the US have rarely had anything to do with any of it.
The interests of the people of the US have had their champions including some influential public movements, but (though not for the first time) the power of money has increasingly "tr#mped" the public's interests in the last four decades. But yes, Iran came immediately to mind as a poster child for the evil wrought by conscienceless, extortionate greed. Reaganomics made the very rich waaay richer, many poorer and most more harried and less secure. That clear from the governments own stats. There are businesses that I admire and some I have genuinely mourned when they closed, but those that live by the "Chicago School" doctrine to "maximize profit" irrespective of the cost to others, have organized around sociopathy.
Totally agree with you and should have been more specific - the US does what is in the interest of corporate US and tells the ignorant masses, who have to foot the bill, be it by providing soldiers or financing the military, that it is in their own interest.
The Shock Doctrine was compelling, and it remains one of the most frightening narratives of how we got to present day economics and political violence.
So much truth in so Nanyang comments in this thread! But do let us keep in mind that the US still has to give lip service to support for democracies because enough of us want to believe in our ideals. Corporations use propaganda to cover their real purposes and their money to buy politicians, so it is up to us to change this. Not easy! And a very long way to go.
But let's follow the vision of true liberty and justice for all. Not just here, but all over the planet. That would include everything from gender and racial justice to averting disastrous climate change. Enough of a challenge? It'll do!
Marg You are correct that CIA (Ike & the Dulles boys) sought, in concert with the Brits, to oust Mossadeq and support the Shah (who had fled to Rome). In fact, the CIA coup failed and an Iranian general pulled off the toppling of Mossadaq.
The Shah, the ‘Peacock Emperor,’ became increasingly imperial as he became flush with oil revenues in the 1970s. [I had created international bond ratings for Moody’s Investors Service]. When Merrill Lynch brought a $1 billion Iranian bond issue to me in 1975, I immediately told them that, were they to pursue this long-term bond issue I would rate it below investment grade. It was clear to me that the Shah’s Iran was on a slippery slope.]
After the Shah was forced to flee Iran, he finally ended up in Mexico dying of cancer. Henry Kissinger, Nelson Rockefeller, and others lobbied to bring ‘our friend’ the Shah to NYC for medical treatment. This sparked the assault against our Teheran embassy and the 55 embassy hostages.
Thank you, Keith, for this history lesson. I was a senior in college when the embassy hostage crisis took place. The decades earlier events that lead to didn’t seem to be made available for general news consumption, and to my 22 year old ears, it all was blamed on radical Islamic students and student mullahs. As we are reminded now on a nearly daily basis, the truth hurts.
Iran, where a democratically elected government was brought down by the CIA, all the dictators in Vietnam after the US got involved, Nicaragua with the dirty deeds of the Reagan supporters. Etc. Thank you, Talia for reminding us to see reality, as Heather has described it.
And yet, as we decry the Russian crimes against humanity, and there are many, and as we are horrified by their separation of Ukrainian families and by their forcibly placing Ukrainian children with Russian families, what are we doing to unite the 1,000+ children we separated at southern border from their families? Until we have reunited all of the children and parents we tore apart, let us look in the mirror and be mindful of the example that we have set.
We have been working on it. As an immigration attorney, I can tell you that the differences between the Trump and Biden administrations are profound and in a good way. The Biden administration isn't perfect but they inherited an insane mess based on the rule of man and not the rule of law. In the last couple of years, I have won cases in immigration court that were complete losers under Trump.
Thank you Ellen. One of the many messes was tfg use of Title 42 to effectively deport genuine asylum seekers to a sometimes hellish limbo purportedly because of Covid 19. That travesty was set for a SCOTUS oral argument in March. But, Biden's US Solicitor General informed SCOTUS of the impending cessation of COVID 19 regulation in May 2023. In a terse Order, SCOTUS took the Title 42 case OFF calendar. But, the Biden Team's brief to SCOTUS makes good reading.
Agreed. But I wasn't comparing Biden and Trump. I was questioning our smugness about the Russians crimes when we ourselves, as a country, have been guilty of some of the same and have only partially managed to rectify our crimes.
And so, we justify our poor behavior in war as Collateral Damage, as if that makes rampant loss of life is a good thing. It seems to be just fine for the Lords of War who always profit from war and then again in the aftermath for the reconstruction of the society they so ardently crushed.
I don't remember the recent stats but the Biden admin has made real progress on reunification and remains committed to it. We need to make sure that it is legally impossible to repeat.
The ACLU challenged the 4000+ tfg family separstions in Court & is currently negotiating a settlment with the US through the Dept of Homeland Security that may provide victims an expedited process to obtain lawful status so that broken-up families do not have to through the lenthy immigration battle that one separated father of 6 Central American asylum seekers suffered ending in a rare successful asylum claim & the re-uniting one Family in the US: the mother, father. 3 daughters & 1 son are back together. ACLU contact: LEE GELERNT.
Betsy, the Russians have kidnapped thousands of Ukrainian children and are busy brainwashing them. If that is not a crime against humanity, I don’t know what is.
ALI VELSHI was back in the Ukraine Capital yesterday with a 7 person international Crew willing & able to investigate & report any issue arising out of Putin's human atrocities. I expect another two (2) episodes Sunday morning and a wider audience next week in VELSHI's new msnbc starting Time. 🇺🇦
Do you really think this proxy war will stop Putin, we learn nothing from one failed war after another. Putin is horrible but that does not make it right that we poked him into this war.
Fun fact: Supporting an invaded ally does not a "proxy war" make! The more you know!
Prompts for extra credit: Did we also "poke" the dictator in question into committing mass atrocities after invading a peaceful neighbor unprovoked? Would the more correct response be to abandon our ally by doing nothing? Is there any limit to how outrageously evil someone can be before it is a good idea to intervene? And can a war be declared as "failed" when your assistance is actually allowing it to be won?
Please type your essay in 12-point Times New Roman and have it on my desk no later than Friday.
Keith, the assignment is extra credit, so it actually won't be necessary for you to complete if you are already passing the class. And since the class is "Having The Most Basic Idea Of What Is Going On 101," you probably already are!
If you are an overachiever, I grant your requests! The School of the Commentariat officially requires an eyeglass prescription for font disability accomodations, but as long as you don't tell the dean it will be fine.
This is really condescending and incorrect. We did provoke him. And when there was desire and movement between Zelensky and Putin to negotiate a peaceful settlement less than 2 weeks into this war, that effort was shut down. By US!!!! WE wanted that war.
It's absolutely a proxy war. A very dangerous one. Other world leaders are begging us to support peace negotiations. For whatever self-serving reasons, Rs want peace. At this point, that makes a lot more sense than what we're doing right now. Sad and true.
Suz-an, I don't mind anyone calling me condescending; I have long had an "attitude problem," and kept it meticulously maintained. But if you are going to call me incorrect, you are going to need to bring the receipts, and all I'm seeing here are blank scraps. I am a frequent critic of our military and foreign policy, but the evidence against your claim of U.S. provocation is overwhelming. If Russia left tomorrow, this would be over immediately.
Putin has long espoused irredentist views, and for decades has attempted to weaken NATO, even contrary to many agreements signed by Russia. The 2014 Revolution was mostly a response to his efforts to form a puppet government. His annexation of Crimea was provocative, and appeased by the west. He built up troops over a year before the invasion and blatantly lied about his intentions, while the US/NATO did not transfer capabilities to Ukraine until only a few months prior. The invasion itself was launched directly after Putin began propagandizing blatant lies about "de-Nazification" and signed more illegal annexation orders. The peace talks you referred to were distrusted by most international observers, since Russia has a history of phony negotiating tactics, the U.S. did not play any notable intermediary role, they primarily focused on humanitarian corridors. They were also doomed from the outset, as Ukraine insisted on maintaining it's territorial integrity, while Russia would not negotiate over invaded territory and demanded Ukraine hand over its ability to decide its own treaties in the future, polar opposite non-negotiables. The invasion was condemned by all major international bodies, worldwide sanctions were undertaken (at political and economic cost to the US and EU), and aid was provided independently from dozens of countries on every continent. The EU provided military aid for the first time ever. At every opportunity the US and lead providers of aid gave less than requested initially by Ukraine, and never declared a no-fly zone.
Where in here do signs point to "US-driven proxy war a la Vietnam?"
I admit to little knowledge on the subject but I see Putin's influence on tRump for 4 years and tfg's shenanigans in Ukraine as evidence of Putin's softening up Ukraine for take-over. Alas, Putin had to invade when tfg lost reelection.
Hi Will! Not calling YOU condescending... tho if the shoe fits... whatever. Mostly, I find you quite informed and informative. Enlightening, even. Your writing is whip smart, bright, and engaging. I always read it. Thanks for bringing it here!
The tone of your words in that post only... felt condescending and surprisingly uninformed (for a change) to my sensitivities. Others might not agree.
Like Nora, I have also been listening, reading, watching many people (independent, not corporate sources) way smarter than me. And calling on my own background and zillions of decades :-) of study and close observation. So i'm putting this puzzle together differently than you. My current conclusions say that we have a central and destructive part in this conflict, as much as we might want to place ALL 'blame' elsewhere. Just as we decided the war should proceed, we can also decide to stop it and get everyone to the peace table. Not as easy now as it was a year ago. Still, Ukraine is nowhere without us.
These issues are complex. They're always basically human relationships. Goodness knows, human relations have always been fraught. International relationships are even more difficult and are on a grander scale, often affecting many populations. This particular situation is needlessly foolish and dangerous to the entire world. Putin is not Hitler.
We, Americans, have a very long history of bullying the rest of the world with little knowledge or regard for subtle and not-so-subtle matters that we might not even be aware of, that are nevertheless highly offensive or threatening or otherwise unsettling to others with less power. Because we can. And that is never helpful for genuine cooperation and peace. We can't ever underestimate or dismiss these things.
We have the power and don't need to concern ourselves with how our policies or actions or proclamations, etc. affect others. So we often don't. Whether we're simply arrogant or ignorant or whatever doesn't matter in the end. We rule... or at least we have so far during the past hundred years or so.
President Obama wisely said that Ukraine was not in our sphere of influence. Not worth starting WWIII over. And he stayed OUT. Has anyone asked WHY are we really sooo involved in this conflict?? I've heard plenty of platitudes and BS excuses.
No one has legitimately explained WHY we are sooo willing to send our money and arms to this conflict. The logical reasons seem to rest in the profiteering of our MIC and now perhaps Wall Street licking their chops over how they're gonna 'rebuild' Ukraine. If you have other valid info, then let's have it!
Russia has an economy that's the size of Italy's. They are NOT gonna take over Europe. Even Macron realizes that. If Putin (or anyone) set up arms on our southern or northern border... or hey, in Cuba! ... we would NOT just shrug and ignore it.
While we don't like Putin, he is a creature of his country's brutal history. In some ways, his patience thus far has amazed me, considering he might be the crazy person we all believe him to be. I'm beginning to doubt he's as out to lunch as we all think. He's not stupid. Luckily, he's also not the narcissistic, impulsive idiot cheeto is, either. However, his macho back is against the wall.
Recently, President Lula of Brazil visited to bring his urgent message of PEACE. Not sure we got his message clearly. Our MSM certainly didn't. He's not the only one who seriously wants to help stop this nonsense and get us back on track for a peaceful world. We all have much bigger issues and more important issues to focus on if we're to survive, never mind thrive in the future.
You can research this info yourself and decide what you think. I only ask that you consider that there might be more than you or I or any one of us knows to this situation before we decide we know for sure what's what. Too much at stake. We have some serious troubles to resolve for ALL of us. Going off with only partial and/or incorrect info because those who stand to benefit from our not questioning them and their motives (MSM, etc) doesn't serve any of us. We can and need to do better than that.
The whole world is in flux right now. Realignment of everything, everywhere is what's happening. We're all living thru it... and it's bizarro for sure. Question everything. We're all doing the best we can with what we have.
Deep bow to you, Will. Your generation and your children's futures depend on this.
Sorry for the late reply, Suz-an. Your response was so sincere, thorough, and well elucidated, I figured you deserved something in kind.
I will forgo dredging up any further laundry listing of facts surrounding this issue, under the assumption that we are both intelligent people with high quality sources of a variety of sources (MSM & non-MSM). I will simply try to answer your question of "WHY are sooo involved [&] sooo willing to send our money and arms to this conflict?" I cannot answer this question for "we," the general citizenry, but I can and will answer for "I," the single citizen. A citizen who is a proud Win Without War member. A citizen who constantly calls his Senators every year in vain to ask to slash the Pentagon budget. A citizen who thinks this is the only post-WW2 conflict of which I approve of and demand our participation in (barring the very, very initial 9/11 response).
As a US citizen, my stance on Ukraine assistance is derived from what I see as an ironclad moral stance, rather than an arcane geopolitical one. It is pretty clear-cut to me: in the 21st century, the territorial integrity of a peaceful nation is sacred, non-negotiable, and paramount. Period. Furthermore, each nation should be free to enter its own alliances and conduct its own affairs without intimidation or interference. Period. I think that if any country is having these precepts violated, and are even tangentially allied to us, we should provide as much assistance as possible, and failure to do so would be an absolute betrayal of our stated value of self-determination. (Ironically, this is why I don't support so many other US foreign actions: I find we use our might to selectively interfere rather than defend against interference.) And ideally we should not go it alone in a show of unilateral power, we should be leaders in an international coalition forcefully rejecting any attempt to violate this integrity. I am very glad to see the Biden administration finally taking this approach with Ukraine.
And I staunchly believe these things consistently, regardless of how big or small the countries involved are, or the level of our perceived national interests prior. China invades Indonesia? We should help. North Macedonia invades Lichtenstein? We should help. And so on. Every other possible situation that is not an ally being attacked on their internationally-recognized land (Ukraine), or us being attacked directly (9/11), we should solve using diplomacy alone, or stay out entirely.
It is interesting you bring up the Obama administration stance in this arena, because it is perhaps the only time I, as a citizen, felt Obama got something completely and totally wrong. We should indeed have led a response to the Crimea "annexation," and Ukraine should have been given NATO (and EU) status 15 years ago when they first requested it. His lack of foresight in prioritizing this on the international stage led us to where we are now.
I am simply rejecting on both ethical and purely logical grounds the idea NATO "coming to Russia's doorstep" serves as a reasonable provocation for Russia to defend itself preemptively. Jumping off your example, if Mexico began amassing a larger military while attempting to enter into a pact with China, I certainly would be enormously concerned. I would not, however, support a lightning strike on Mexico City a viable response, for Pete's sake. Each country gets to conduct its own alliances and affairs, and maintain its own borders. Period.
Lastly, I see no convincing sign that US pressure would get peace talks successfully started, nor am I seeing the sign that other leaders are fervently hoping we do so. Ukrainian leadership and Russian leadership have both banned talks unless mutually exclusive terms are met, terms which are essential to the conflict rather than secondary. Plus, I don't see how any pressure we would bring would not count as simply another form of interference in matters.
I hope this makes sense! Thank you for the engagement on this. Even if we don't agree, how refreshing IS this forum that it makes room for such discourse, in addition to the typical snappy responses? Very refreshing indeed.
Don't you remember that Putin against any rules of international law occupied the Krim, after he had - again against all rules of international law - had started wars agains Georgia and Tschechnia, carpet-bombing Syria? I think you're falling for the Russian propaganda with Putin's constant complaining how unfairly Russia is treated, however, I can't remember at any stage in the last 30-40 years that any Western politician, leave alone NATO leader, would have said "lets go attack Russia!" Appeasement didn't work when Chamberlain did it, it won't work with Putin either.
Pray tell, how did we “provoke” him? Sounds like the Putin assertion , which is nonsense, “you’re putting NATO on our border”. The only peace deal put forward was to cede Donbas.
Vietnam was effectively a proxy war too. And that one certainly came to a sad conclusion, and at a huge price. Gotta wonder. I welcome any contrast anyone would like to make.
I’m going to make this short and sweet: Putin has said time & time again that he means to “restore” the USSR. He needs to be contained now before he goes for Poland or the Baltics, which would lead us straight into WW3. This is not a theory but reality. Also, as noted, appeasement never works with tyrants.
William 550,000 American soldiers in Vietnam I don’t consider a ‘proxy war.’ Also tens of thousands of dead Americans and far more wounded, often with PTSD. Ukraine is a proxy war,’ since we have virtually no American boots on the ground.
Ex military myself and appreciate your clarification Keith. I was using proxy in the sense that the the South Vietnamese were fighting their war for us, in analogous way to the Ukrainians fighting their war for us. And the total dead in Ukraine is working its way up to our American death count (in Vietnam) which is nowhere near the total death count of the Vietnam War. I have nothing but sympathy and respect for those of my peers who gave their lives for a mistake.
When was he poked into this war? Is the imagined security threat of Putin more important than the true security threat that other countries had to experience - Georgia, Tschechnia etc and now Ukraine? Europe was for now decades appeasing Putin - what's the result?
I don't think you quite understand Putin's thinking - Putin wants to resurrect an empire the size of the former Sowjet Union, there is no doubt. Now, you can say "where is this the US's problem if he takes over at least half of Europe?" but I think it would become a very difficult world to live in for the US, leave alone of course that one thing is conquering countries but another thing to keep them. This whole one-man show will still cost a lot of Russian and other lifes is my uneducated guess.
Nora, no one poked him into the war. He wants to be Putin the great. Memorable, as he shall be … like hitler … admired like Peter the Great … Nup. Peter wanted closer ties with Europe.
Oh yes we did along with NATO. We destabilized Ukraine by sticking our nose into it in 2014 and then poked the bear with the expansion of NATO. If you don’t believe it you are only reading MSM and the party line. We are the country of failed never ending war and it is our foreign policy that continues this. My resources are, Chris Hedges, Democracy Now, Jeffery Sachs, Matt Taibbi, Aron Mate, Code Pink among others.
I recommend Timothy Snyder’s “Thinking About...” Substack posts to you. His depth of understanding of the Ukraine situation and also how fascism and tyranny operate has been very useful to me in gaining perspective after hearing the views of Chris Hedges.
Nora - for example, I highly recommend Dr. Snyder’s summary of what’s wrong with Putin’s justification for his ambitions in Ukraine, more specifically Crimea:
I do not ask this question in anger, nor is it rhetorical: in all sincerity, can you explain how "we poked him into this war" because I honestly don't know how you came to that conclusion.
Smarter people than me informed me, Pulitzer Prize winning journalists have said this and I listed my sources already so I will not waste my time or yours if you can’t look beyond the propaganda pushed by the Biden administration or read sources other than the MSM I am not going to convince you. Our interference into Ukraine has been going on since the late 1990s.
Sorry, Matt Taibi and his oh so self serving/self enriching “Twitter Files”immediately disqualifies your sources, and your opinions seem rather propagandist.
Let’s not forget that before he went into politics, Rick Scott took over HCA, changed its name & ran it into the ground while personally benefiting financially. His behavior & goals haven’t changed.
100 Didn’t Trump proclaim that anyone exercising his/her Fifth Amendment right was admitting guilt, BEFORE starting to sing Fifth Amendment like a canary?
I just posted the same, before I saw your post. BTW, I don't know if Cohen said where he got those words from. They are a direct quote from Wikipedia. I acknowledge that in my post.
Thank you once again for a wonderful summary of the last few days.
Barry Goldwater warned about Christian nationalism taking over the Republican Party and he was right:
"Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the (Republican) party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me.
Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them."
But don't forget, in 1964, Goldwater was the first Republican to win the South by getting bigotted Democrats to switch parties.
The GQP is made up of two extremist groups and they both believe in a social hierarchy of inequality and the use of severe punishment to enforce their hierarchy of white, Chistrianist, supremacy.
The preachers and their counterparts in all countries use their cruel God and unholy religion for their takeover. They can sucker a whole bunch of people that way. Take power, control, dominate.
Maybe... if they're even aware on a conscious level that this is what's happening. If they are making any kind of conscious choice. Often, my guess is they don't. As a mentor of mine always says, "The goldfish doesn't know it's in the water."
What about the closeted gay or trans ones? Or the kids who have long since lost respect for their parents and their parents ways of thinking? Or the ones who are finding it difficult to reconcile the people they are drawn to with their more liberal ways of thinking. Just a crack is how the light gets in. Paraphrasing Leonard Cohen. And by the way. It was Cohen who wrote and sang the lyrics “...and they’ll be a meter on your bed” which I didn’t understand at the time that album came out. Now I do.
I lean toward the hopeful side. And I’m listening to your thoughts with pricked ears and know you are right. My belief is that more people than not, many more, can tell when a person is speaking from the truth and from the heart compared to the hyped up speakers we see who are angry, robotic and glazed over. Don jr’s videos are an example of this but there are many out there. We’ve got this.
Exactly. It’s because the congregation, their peer groups, and their friends and relatives anchor the whole thing down. Nobody is free to leave without giving up everyone they know and their town as well.
'Social Security pays benefits out of its retirement and disability trust funds. Think of these as checking accounts, with funds flowing in primarily from the Federal Insurance Contributions Act, or FICA, which levies a 12.4 percent tax on wages that is split by employers and workers. The combined trust fund accounts are projected to be depleted in 2035.'
'Lower birthrates mean that fewer workers are paying into the system today than the growing number of people retiring and collecting benefits. Another cause of the shortfall is rising income inequality. Social Security collects FICA contributions only up to a certain wage ($160,200 this year), leaving a growing share of wages outside the taxable base.'
'Unless Congress acts by 2035, Social Security funds will be sufficient to pay only about 80 percent of the program’s obligations to retirees and disabled workers. The resulting benefit cut — estimated at 20 to 25 percent over time — would affect current and future beneficiaries alike, pushing up poverty rates among retirees by 60 percent, according to projections by the Urban Institute.'
'The cuts would be especially painful for today’s younger workers and people of color, according to the institute’s projections. If the financing gap is left unaddressed, 49 percent of workers born from 1980 to 1989, or early millennials, would lack the income they need to meet basic living expenses — a rate that jumps to 53 percent for Black adults in that age group, and 62 percent for Hispanic adults.'
“People of color depend disproportionately on Social Security, so if benefits are cut it’s going to be especially devastating for them,” said Richard Johnson, senior fellow and director of the Urban Institute’s Program on Retirement Policy.'
'Aside from the 2035 problem, Social Security is already on track to replace less pre-retirement income for today’s younger workers than for today’s retirees. That is attributable, mainly, to the last major changes to the program, which were enacted in 1983. That legislation put in motion a gradual increase in the Full Retirement Age, or F.R.A. — the age when you qualify to receive 100 percent of your benefit. Before 1983, the F.R.A. was 65, but for everyone born in 1960 and later, it is 67. Every year increase in the F.R.A. equates roughly to a 6.5 percent cut in benefits.'
'Just this week, Senators Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts introduced the latest version of their own Social Security proposal. It would extend solvency by 75 years, give nearly all beneficiaries an increase of $200 per month through a revision in the benefit formula and adopt a more generous annual cost-of-living increase. It would be funded by applying current FICA tax rates to incomes above $250,000, and with two new taxes on investment income.' (NYTimes)
The Sanders/Warren proposal would be a huge step in the right direction. Another step would be to make the FICA tax progressive and apply it to investment income as well. It's called redistributing the wealth. This GOP will never vote for it, of course.
I do not understand your reply, AndyWAWG. Universal Basic Income is not a form of SS. I do not know if it is intended as a replacement for SS by the right-wing of the Republican Party. Clearly, it warrants examination. From what I read it is a token of relief.
I’m trying to point out that BMI can come in many forms funded in many ways and that SS is one of these possible forms of income. I’m trying to show SS as one example of BMI to help see the benefit of BMI. See details below on average incomes and average SS payments for those 65 or older:
"Consider the Average Social Security Payment
"The average Social Security benefit is expected to be $1,827 per month in January 2023. The maximum possible Social Security benefit for someone who retires at full retirement age is $3,627 in 2023. However, a worker would need to earn the maximum taxable amount, currently $160,200 for 2023, over a 35-year career to get this Social Security payment."
* The average income for U.S. adults 65 and older is $75,254.
* The median income for U.S. adults 65 and older is $47,620.
* Average annual expenses for adults 65 and older are $48,872. [$4,073/month]
* The average monthly Social Security benefit for retired workers is $1,681 and is set to rise to $1,827 in 2023."
"When we break this down on a monthly basis, the average income for U.S. adults aged 65 and older is $6,271. The median monthly income for that age group is $3,968."
As shown above SS income does not account for all income of those 65 or older. The average monthly SS income is only 46% of the MEDIAN income of adults 65 or older and 29% of AVERAGE income based on reports referenced above. Average SS covers only 45% of average expenses.
Thanks, Andy. I did take some time to identify the basis for Universal Basic Income, including the countries that have considered and or implemented it in some way from Brazil to the UK. I even chased down Bernie Sanders' comments on UBI. I think we in the US are in a mess of various types of supplementary support -- SNAP, SSNAP, WIC, Medicaid, SAMHSA,, SSI, SSA, Student Debt., USCitizenServies, LIHEAP, etc., Who has a plan to coordinate our insufficient and poorly administered support of Americans in need of it?
I do not know what AndyWAWG has in mind. Unless you have conferred with him, I suggest an understanding of the country's history of Social Security:
'The Social Security Act was signed into law by President Roosevelt on August 14, 1935. In addition to several provisions for general welfare, the new Act created a social insurance program designed to pay retired workers age 65 or older a continuing income after retirement. (Full Text of President Roosevelt's Statement At Bill Signing Ceremony.)'
"We can never insure one hundred percent of the population against one hundred percent of the hazards and vicissitudes of life, but we have tried to frame a law which will give some measure of protection to the average citizen and to his family against the loss of a job and against poverty-ridden old age."--
President Roosevelt upon signing Social Security Act'
Historical Background And Development Of Social Security is found SSA.gov
An official website of the Social Security Administration. Produced and published at taxpayer expense.
The following was taken from our history of Social Security,
'Civil War Pensions: America's First "Social Security" Program'
'Although Social Security did not really arrive in America until 1935, there was one important precursor, that offered something we could recognize as a social security program, to one special segment of the American population. Following the Civil War, there were hundreds of thousands of widows and orphans, and hundreds of thousands of disabled veterans. In fact, immediately following the Civil War a much higher proportion of the population was disabled or survivors of deceased breadwinners than at any time in America's history. This led to the development of a generous pension program, with interesting similarities to later developments in Social Security. (The first national pension program for soldiers was actually passed in early 1776, prior even to the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Throughout America's ante-bellum period pensions of limited types were paid to veterans of America's various wars. But it was with the creation of Civil War pensions that a full-fledged pension system developed in America for the first time.)'
'As America slipped into economic depression following the Crash of 1929, unemployment exceeded 25%; about 10,000 banks failed; the Gross National Product declined from $105 billion in 1929 to only $55 billion in 1932. Compared to pre-Depression levels, net new business investment was a minus $5.8 billion in 1932. Wages paid to workers declined from $50 billion in 1929 to only $30 billion in 1932.'
'The Social Security program that would eventually be adopted in late 1935 relied for its core principles on the concept of "social insurance." Social insurance was a respectable and serious intellectual tradition that began in Europe in the 19th century and was an expression of a European social welfare tradition. It was first adopted in Germany in 1889 at the urging of the famous Chancellor, Otto von Bismarck. Indeed, by the time America adopted social insurance in 1935, there were 34 nations already operating some form of social insurance program(about 20 of these were contributory programs like Social Security). Philosophically, social insurance emphasized government-sponsored efforts to provide for the economic security of its citizens. The tradition of social insurance would come to be seen as the reasonable, practical alternative to the radical calls to action represented by Townsend, Long, Sinclair and the others.'
'Although the definition of social insurance can vary considerably in its particulars, its basic features are: the insurance principle under which a group of persons are "insured" in some way against a defined risk, and a social element which usually means that the program is shaped in part by broader social objectives, rather than being shaped solely by the self-interest of the individual participants. Social insurance coverage can be provided for a number of different types of insured conditions, from disability and death to old-age or unemployment. We may find it obvious to think of death, disability or unemployment as conditions causing loss of income and which can be ameliorated by pooling of risk. It is at first a little odd to think of old-age or retirement in these same terms. But that is precisely how the early social insurance theorists conceived of retirement, as producing a loss of income due to cessation of work activity.'
I'm 74 and I was always told SS was meant to keep the old from starving to death. Take one look at how we treat our elderly today,anyone living on SS alone, in elderly housing, has a subsistence income. Retirees with a comfortable circumstance have additional income. I did not confer with anyone but I know what he meant about "Basic Minimum Income for retired people."
Thank you for your response, dotsieradzki. I was responding to your interpretation of what AndyWAWG may have meant. I agree, that many groups of Americans, families, elderly, youth and disabled are not supported in the way that some politicians, media 'stars' and spokespeople representing their own self-interest and ideologies threatening democracy misrepresent our current socio-economic issues.
The following are not encouraging.
'Social Security services to worsen despite budget boost, agency head says'
FERN Fine summation, but the chances of the Sanders/Warren proposal clearing Congress is akin to my winning the 100 meter dash at the Olympics with my walker. Not impossible, but rather unlikely.
Keith, we have to keep asking McCarthy and his tribe to support this proposal, spelling it out, over and over again, so that the American people hear it. Sanders' and Warren's proposal is for the people and we want it. When it passes, we will carry you and all the people it will help across the finish line.
In the early 1980s the Social Security Trust Funds had developed short-term cash flow problems, as a result of the adverse performance of the economy during the "stagflation" of the 1970s. As a stop-gap measure, Congress passed legislation in 1981 to permit inter-fund borrowing among the three Trust Funds (the Old-Age and Survivors Trust Fund; the Disability Trust Fund; and the Medicare Trust Fund). This authority was to lapse at the end of 1982. However, the 1983 Amendments extended the inter-fund borrowing authority to the end of 1987. Under the law as amended, all loans would have to be repaid by the end of 1989.
The inter-fund loans were required to be repaid with an amount of interest equal to that which the loaning fund would have earned had it had use of the money during this time. In other words, the borrowing fund was required to make the loaning fund whole at the end of the process.
This authority was used twice, once in November 1982 and once in December 1982. The total amount borrowed was $17.5 billion. The Old-Age and Survivors Trust Fund borrowed the money-$5.1 billion from the Disability Trust Fund and $12.4 billion from the Medicare Trust Fund. Repayment began in 1985 and the debt to the Medicare Trust Fund was paid off by January 1986 and the debt to the Disability Trust Fund was liquidated in April 1986. (SS Agency, History. This is an archival or historical document and may not reflect current policies or procedures)
For further interest on your part, you may check the following:
WOW: As always, thank you for your Post. The links you provided were especially useful in clearing up the many misconceptions we encounter in daily conversations.
Keep in mind Social Security was always funded by workers, workers who were not making six-digit yearly incomes and whose income was measured in hourly wages. It is the worker's benefit which makes it a liability for politicians to eliminate it or dimmish it. SS belongs to us and not to the millionaires.
About a decade ago two people I write with proposed a plan to secure SS funding beyond what it is today or what it was 10 years ago. It increased withholding one tenth of 1% each year for individuals and companies. Over a decade, it would equate to an increase of 1% for people and for companies. Yearly increases in US productivity surpasses this. It would not be burdensome to either business or labor.
Social Security belongs to workers or Labor and not millionaires. The idea is to keep it as such and not tax the upper income levels. As it i, if your income surpasses a certain point while on SS, you will pay more tax. If you use Medicare, you will also pay more above a certain income after retirement.
The plan was called the Northwest Plan as written by Dale Coberly and Bruce Webb. to Congressman DeFazio who in turn sent it to the Social Security administration. Karen P. Glenn
Deputy Chief Actuary, Office of the Chief Actuary, Social Security Administration responded back to both Dale and Bruce and in turn copied Rina Wulfing from Rep. DeFazio’s office and Defazio on this email. Part of the text:
"Your proposal would increase the payroll tax rate gradually, by 0.2 percentage point per year beginning in 2018 (a 0.1-percent increase for employees and employers, each). Based on the tables you provided, it appears you would propose an “automatic adjustment” to the rate in the future, allowing the tax rate increases to stop and then resume, applying a 0.2 percentage point increase whenever the 10th year subsequent would otherwise have a trust fund ratio (TFR) less than 100 percent of annual cost. The intent appears to be that TFR would not fall below 100 percent. If we are understanding your proposal correctly, this type of adjustment would very likely maintain trust fund solvency for the foreseeable future, based on the Trustees’ intermediate assumptions."
In other words, it would work using a minimalist action.
If you are a reader of Prof. Dean Baker, he has a commentary on US Productivity. "Declining population and diminished national power is bad news?"
Census Bureau "Statistical Replacement Rate in 2020 fell to 1,637.5 births per 1,000 women, down from 1.7 births per 1,000 women in 2019, and also down from 2,01 in 2006. "300 Million and Counting," Joel Garreau.
Twenty twenty-one is the first year since 1937 the U.S. population grew by fewer than one million people. The lowest numeric growth since at least 1900 (Census Bureau began annual population estimates).
Does this matter? Only if you are a nervous white person as immigrants to the US appear to have larger families. Eventually, everyone blends.
Back to a point, I will get to shortly. Dean Baker:
"The gains from higher productivity should swamp the impact of a rising ratio of retirees to workers."
Getting beyond these issues of a growing population of retirees.
"The question is whether societies will really suffer if they see a secular decline in population over many decades. While it is fashionable among intellectual types to assert that falling populations are a disaster, the logic for this argument is lacking.
The essence of the disaster story is that we will have fewer workers to support a growing population of retirees. The implication is that either retirees will have to get by with less money or workers will face an impossible tax burden.."
Two points Dean makes:
- "The impact of normal productivity growth swamps the impact of demographic changes, and
- It’s not clear that supply constraints (i.e., too few workers, too many retirees) are even the main problem facing aging societies. The widely accepted story of “secular stagnation” is that aging societies suffer from too little demand, the complete opposite problem of too few workers."
Concluding:
"Taking these in turn, it should be clear to anyone familiar with economic data that even modest rates of productivity growth have far more impact on living standards than changing demographics. The years 2010 to 2025 are the peak years of the retirement of the baby boom cohort in the United States. The Social Security Trustees project that the aged dependency ratio (the number of people over age 65 divided by the number of people between the ages of 20 and 64) will increase from 0.218 in 2010 to 0.325 in 2025.
We can plausibly see more rapid rates of productivity growth. If productivity growth were to average 2.0 percent over a 15-year period, roughly the post-World War II average, the before-tax real wage would rise by almost 35 percent. This would allow for a gain in after-tax income for both workers and retirees of more than 20 percent, even with the rapid increase in the ratio of retirees to workers associated with the retirement of the baby boomers."
Is there an issue? Dean Baker who is far more knowledgeable than I am on this topic does not see it this way. "Declining Populations is a Problem for Politicians, Policy Types, and Pundits."
Are we in trouble? The depression was serious as well at Wall Street blowing up Main Street in 2008. We just got through a vicious pandemic with many people resisting. The burden on SS and Medicare has been somewhat lessened with their passing.
Bill: I have posted information with regard to the history of social security in the US. I am sorry that I have not followed or examined the proposal you have put forward.
Thank you for sharing, Fern. I have tried to explain this to my young adult children, this is an excellent, concise article and I am going to share it with them.
I don't think it's that simple. If they killed Social Security and Medicare, loads of them would be voted out of office, and a lot of them realize that.
You're assuming that there would ever be another free vote if the Republicans retake both houses and the presidency. If they are able to end Social Security and Medicare, they will be aware of the consequences and will not allow themselves to be voted out of office.
Democracy is not a given in this country. Some will defend it while others will seek personal advantage by working to end it. You cannot assume that we are all playing by the same rules.
I think it's important to add the qualifier that if the CURRENT VERSION OF the Republicans retake both houses and the presidency, there might never be another free vote.
As Heather has pointed out, parties can change dramatically over time. And our system does not mathematically make room for more than two major parties. So while the CURRENT VERSION of the Repubs is deeply dangerous, in half a century it could well be the other way around. They care about power. One or two hard elections won't be enough to grow some sense, but another one or two...
Pedantic, I know, but I think it's essential not to rhetorically hem ourselves in.
True, Will. Though sitting down here in Florida watching the DeSantis regime wreak havoc instills a sense of immediacy that makes me less sanguine of the long term. The athletic board decided not to require girls report their menstrual history. The legislative answer? Dissolve the board and replace with DeSantis appointees. Don’t even get me started on his crony heavy plan to reform the college system. So much of the future, as always I suppose, will be a story of rebuilding.
My scary-optimistic hope is that DeSantis' continued success in Florida will lead to continued overreach, and that two more years of ever more outrageous actions will make him unelectable outside of complete MAGA states. If nothing else, he is providing all the material needed for the 2024 Democratic campaign ads, if he happens to be the candidate.
I'm genuinely sorry that Floridians have to deal with him the interim, but he is revealing more and more of a truly authoritarian personality and it will hopefully do him in before too long.
Certainly both the Democratic and Republican parties have noticeably changed in my lifetime. Like entropy, the lure of big lies and treachery never goes away, but if enough turn against it, even the Republican Party might improve, assuming they are OK with with retaining the tainted label.
Unfortunately, Republican party is totally infused with crazy religious nuts now--and they don't just care about power, they are cultists on a mission. Sense won't get knocked into people who have beliefs they think are 'superior' to our laws. They'll just ignore the laws because they are 'special'. Don't forget the attempt to cobble together a bunch of fake electors in the last election, or the ridiculous lawsuits of Kari Lake and others that are gumming up our court system today.
You are making the same assumption that Democrats have been making since the 80s to our great detriment. That Republicans operate in good faith and that they care about the results. These are the people who were responsible for hundreds of thousands of needless deaths from COVID, who supported an actual violent insurrection, and still get re-elected. They are willing to drive us over the cliff. If you look at what they have been trying to do in earnest since the Powell Memo, you will realize that the ensuing chaos is a feature, not a bug, for them.
Ah yes. Genocide by Protracted Neglect. What a plan. What a plan. Nefarious and wrapped in their own version of platitudes. White Racism at its most frightening.
Yes, but they also know that the ‘sheep’ don’t have long memories, so they will forget that come election time. Plus you have your staunch voters “my daddy was a Republican and by God, I’m voting Republican!” Hell, Donald Duck could put his name on the ballot as Republican candidate and they’d vote for him!
Bad example tho. Donald Duck would never make it past the primary. Sure, he has the anger issues the base desires, as well as the connections to Uncle Scrooge. But his membership in the Three Caballeros would start rumors about Mexican ancestry, and the lack of pants would be seen as too LGBT-accepting.
Will And the “Republicans’ would serve duck a la orange at their MAGA fundraisers. Perhaps they would prefer Mickey Mouse, who is closer to their rat ancestry.
This reminds me of my WW II experience on a farm where, as the youngest kid, I was responsible for ‘dispatching’ and then plucking the ducks. Have you ever plucked a duck?
I love all these analogies yo my “Donald Duck”,. They are great, and honestly I guess I should have thought some before using him. But, he is a “Donald”, and he is a cartoon character, which gives me the thought I should have said “char toon character on the ballot” and the sheep of the current GOP would vote for them, damn their platform other than “MAGAA”!
Can't just end these programs instantly. It is essentially a contract so someone who paid in for 45 years and is retiring the day GOP votes to end it has rights to the benefits they paid for. So any mechanism to unwind it would be a complicated mess subject to judicial oversight.
Where is the contract written? It's not a personal retirement program where you get what you paid in. It's an insurance program so that when we are elderly or infirm, we don't end up in a poorhouse or in the gutter. It's based on compassion and the greater good, two things that the Republicans actively are opposing and have been since the New Deal.
I have posted this remark by Lincoln before, but believe it clarifies a fundamental truth:
“That is the issue that will continue in this country when these poor tongues of Judge Douglas and myself shall be silent. It is the eternal struggle between these two principles -- right and wrong -- throughout the world. They are the two principles that have stood face to face from the beginning of time, and will ever continue to struggle. The one is the common right of humanity and the other the divine right of kings.”
Like our battles with disease, the fight with authoritarianism is never won, only to a greater of lesser extent contained.
Yeah, well. Those Voldemort Scott cuts to government jobs and selling off of “non-essentials” is timed perfectly for the perfect storms we’ve seen due to climate change. Let go of those FEMA slackers and such and see how well that plays out in the midst of another Katrina, Joplin Tornado, now-typical season of wildfires in the West (and increasingly across the U.S.). Cut those emergency relief humans and capabilities when a Norfolk Southern trainload of toxic chemicals derails outside of Pittsburg or some other major population center and see how that goes. Republicans have set us up for this nightmare of having to play catch-up and unscrew after each Republican administration further hollows out the middle class by protecting the oligarchs -- our sacred one percent of the wealthiest Americans who are protected as if they are looking out for the rest of us, sharing the rewards of everyone’s hard work as opposed to greedily grabbing stock buybacks, record profits, and protecting shareholders over employees.
As God is my witness the battle between Carter and Reagan, and Reagan’s win, has haunted and continues to haunt us. It is perilously close to impossible to unscrew thanks to the sales job the great communicator mouthpiece put over on folks.
I love HCR, that you point out repeatedly the economic cluster-botch Reagan, Rove, Cheney and the Kochs engineered. It is in such contrast to Biden’s building an economy from the bottom up and the middle out.
As Jimmy Carter, our greatest American former President is hospice tonight, I hope all who lauded Reagan for his slick communications skills will stack that unctuous and fatuous acting talent against the 50+ years of Mr. Carter’s post-presidency, spent in earnest hard work on behalf of the poor, Democracy, Human Rights, Civil Rights, humanitarian endeavors to prevent River Blindness, homelessness, the relentless savagery of brutal dictators. This man stood fearlessly in jungles, he and his wife, counting votes and overseeing elections to encourage and protect democracy around the world. Oh! And there were Carter’s energy policies that Rove, Reagan, Cheney, Kochs and the rest scoffed at as they ripped solar panels off of the White House roof as soon as Reagan took office, as if to say Carter’s energy policies were a joke. Scores of oil spills, blow-ups, severe weather and countless climate crisis deaths and losses later, where are Republicans who have the sense and humility to own those energy policy disasters based on lies oil companies promulgated to protect the industry and profits while temperatures increase, ice gaps melted, and Miami and other sea level cities see flooding as the new normal?
I’m sad about Carter. I am a native Georgian who dropped out of college for a year in 1976 to work on his campaign, traveling and handling all manner of projects and events during the primaries, general election before returning to finish school while at the same time helping with the inauguration. In the run up to Carter’s inevitable passing and State Funeral, I hope he is remembered for being a leader with integrity, foresight, faith, genius, and an incomparable dedication to God, family, and humanity. I am so glad Biden made the visit to Plains in 2021. And that he was the first U.S. Senator to endorse Carter in 1976.
Thanks for educating us, Heather, and for evoking memories and stirring passions on a cold winter’s night.
Deeply sad as well about Jimmy Carter, one of the greatest Americans. If only even half our country could have his ideals, integrity, and industriousness, we would be a much better place indeed.
Less sad than I would be otherwise, though, because he has lived very long and very well, long and well enough to receive a portion of the appreciation he deserves.
My sentiments too, Carey! Jimmy Carter exemplifies an endangered species: the politician with integrity who professes AND practices true Christian values!
Rebekha, I almost wrote those very same words, but given the intertextuality of previous days’ LFAA comments about amoral politicians claiming to be “Christian,” I decided it was a propitious opportunity to remind us that there are a few true Christian politicians. I must confess I cannot think of another example at this time.
Thank you so much, Carey, for heralding Jimmy Carter. I was proud to work in his White House for a time, though mine was not a politically-appointed position. I am grateful for your post. I hope others will see him as you have.
And the many other learned folks who add value to our conversations here on the substack. These conversations give me hope that we can overcome the mass illiteracy we are exposed to by the poorly educated, such being by design of the self-proclaimed Patriots who practice deceit in all their actions.
Thanks for posting and continue the good fight in Georgia. I too campaigned for Carter in Oregon--he was such an underdog at the time, no one expected him to win. But he ran a tight race, had good people.
Check out The Outlier, by Kai Bird, a really comprehensive biography of Carter's Presidency. Full disclosure, related to me, but he stands on his own credentials, a Pulitzer Prize winning historian.
Thanks for book recommend. I found an NPR interview with him and was very impressed. I realized that though I was part of that period that there a lot about his presidency that I am unaware of (single mom working and going to school syndrome). Our library is in process of moving temporarily to the Town Hall (while renovations are done- one whole year!). When things have settled a bit for them, I'll give a call and see if they have the book (interlibrary loan if not).
Thank you for bringing us back to the topic of Heather's post today. And for honoring Jimmy Carter. I have been going over in my mind and heart the outsize influence he and Roselyn have had on us as human beings, a legacy that goes way beyond what he attempted to do during his time as President. I am grateful for his long life, and for his dedication to human and spiritual values. I think a good many of our younger citizens have, knowingly or not, been deeply influenced by his example of action and caring. We all can help carry it forward in our own lives and actions. As Carter showed, even small things can have a large impact.
I live in Georgia. I am so tired of and embarrassed by our state’s Republican politicians, especially Marjorie T Greene. I pray for clarity and sanity to return to the GOP. I have become an independent voter with Democratic leanings.
For several years I have suspected that, if given the opportunity, Republicans would sell off our public lands to private developers and the extraction industry in order to (ostensibly) pay down the national debt. It is likely they would even approve selling portions of the land to foreign entities.
This must never be allowed. Our public lands are a national treasure that, once lost, we will never get back. In an age of anthropogenic climate change and looming environmental catastrophe, we need to be more protective of the commons--whether that be land, water, air, or our fellow creatures--not less. We need less private ownership (or at least ownership contingent upon the well-being of the commons and of surrounding communities), not more.
This isn't 1787 anymore, and many of the assumptions upon which our American way of life is built, and especially our economic way of life--such as the infinite abundance and resilience of nature, and the notion that humans have, by divine entitlement, an unmitigated right, or even duty, to plunder and exploit the planet in service of our unquenchable lust for material gain, convenience, and amusements--have proven to be not merely wrong, but egregiously so.
It may be that law cannot make people see right, but it'll have to do until this fog of ignorance lifts from our public consciousness and we begin to realize that all things are connected and that we must attend to the world around us with a spirit of wonder, gratefulness, and reciprocity.
The trope the phony debt hawks (everyone from Joe Manchin on right) trot out to frame their stinginess as compassion: "We just can't leave this mountain of debt to the next generation." How solemnly delivered these words always are. How eminently reasonable the speaker of them always imagines themselves. They always - always - follow this up with how we need to make some "hard choices" to "be responsible."
Except the right choice isn't hard to see. There are only two choices: cut programs, or raise revenue.
DEAR SWEET GOSH AND HIS SON JEEPERS... ****RAISE REVENUE!!!!!****
Almost every domestic program currently in place suffers from the problems of underfunding and redundant red tape, not superfluousness. It's not just SS & Medicare; almost every domestic program is there for a clearly identified reason, took a heck of a lot of effort to establish, and would be missed by a lot of suddenly sad and angry people if it went away, even if they didn't know it existed prior to it going away. The Repubs - cowards all, really - know this. When it comes time to cut, they can't seem to face the potential consequences. But the only alternative to piling on more debt is unthinkable to them.
RAISE REVENUE.
You care about what you're leaving to future generations? Ask THEM what they think about the issue, why dontcha? I'm younger than almost every member of Congress, so let me briefly appoint myself spokesperson. Or actually, I don't have to. We already collectively spoke our opinion through our votes last election, and the one before that, and the one before that. Our opinion is that we want more programs, not fewer, we want them to be more robust and directly effective, and we want you to do this while ALSO lowering the debt by doing the only obviously remaining option:
RAISE REVENUE.
Preferably on people who could dance gleefully around a bonfire of Ben Franklins bills each night and never burn enough to have to part with their planet-ruining jet. But, hey, I'll pitch in too. Whatever.
But if you refuse to drop the horsesh!t that to RAISE REVENUE is some kind of sacrilege, kindly shut your condescending wrinkly dry mouth, because we all know who is "responsible" for this debt, and it is you and your rich corporate friends.
In the name of dear sweet Yaweh, Allah, Vishnu, and Buddah, and whatever moon wizard they still pray to in some corner of the Amazon, RAISE REVENUE READ MY NIKES THEY SAY "JUST DO IT" I TRIPLE DOG DARE YOU
Will, I believe I recall you stating you were 27? 28? years old. You have reached a level of maturity that I still haven't reached at 66---and that many will NEVER achieve.
Someday, young sir, I believe the future holds elected office for you, or at least, widespread positive media influence. I hope that I am still alive and able to support your endeavors, whatever they might be. Please don't make me wait too long though!
Thank you, Gayle. You are a gem. And a remarkable writer, and I don't mind at all you taking the mantle of spokesperson. You speak for me as my younger self, and for me as the elder lady I have become. You are one of the reasons that I am feeling optimistic about our future, along with all the younger folks who are speaking up, speaking out, and taking action.
"One person there told Jack Detsch and Robbie Gramer of Foreign Policy, 'To me, the subtext was clear: We’re not the crazies like the small handful of House Republicans you see in the headlines so often.'"
Still, the thought simply must be emerging in anyone looking at the U.S. from the outside and possessing a mind with capacity to think: "How does a democracy of the people place such crazies into positions of power?" We need to clarify that answer for ourselves and plug whatever path of partisan corruption allows crazies to gain such access. We cannot afford the damage imparted by the "small handful" we already have.
A Mitch McConnell quote worth noting in that Foreign Policy article: “ Don’t look at Twitter, look at people in power,” he said. “My party’s leaders overwhelmingly support a strong, involved America and a robust trans-Atlantic alliance.”
Right?! Didn't mean to pun but just happened. His "party's leaders" (and he is still a big one) have been gerrymandering the voting process as fast as they can everywhere they can for years now. Nice try to come across as a bipartisan engaging politician. We seem to be fooled here but I doubt our European friends are.
OH yes lets send everything out to the private sector. I'm a Fed employee. I am in Aviation. (That's a huge hint... and no I'm not a controller) Last month when everything ground to a halt and peoples flights were grounded it was because of a Contractors equipment and its contractors maintained. Yeah... lets keep doing that. Did you know that the Federal Govt "GIVES" for free information that private companies then package up and makes people pay for it. Then when that agency has an issue like last month the private companies come back and sue the agency and they generally win and get money out of us. All because there was an interruption.
As another example, the National Weather Service gives it taxpayer-paid information collection to every weather foeecasting outlet to then make money with. Wtf.
Luckily, tfg's nominee to head NOAA, Barry Myers (former CEO of the predatory Accu-weather) never ended up in that seat! Myers's aim was to completely hollow out and officially privatize NWS.
Thankfully, Biden brought us an actual scientist - oceanographer - to fill that position.
Interesting, Alley!! Yay for your Dad!! And YOU!! Wx Weenies Unite!! Have you ever read The Perfect Storm??? Sooo well written... about the macho politics of US Weather Bureau vs. Cuban weather experts, and the long, slow approach (with ALL the signs from Nature) of that hurricane that decimated Galveston ~1903.
It's an incredible piece of work. And will haunt you forever after. Still haven't visited Galveston yet. I've heard that some of the damage remains from that storm. Lemme know what you think!
GOP Infighting. Let the games begin!! -- Can't wait to see what kind of budget proposal they can possibly agree on. The rift is growing if (as this Letter details) McConnell and many of the Senate Republicans are not going to follow the lead of the crazies in the House.
It doesn’t matter whether McConnell and a few other Republican Senators aren’t like the crazies in the House because upwards of 70 million American voters are most definitely like the crazies in the House. That’s how the crazies in the House got into the House. Even if by some miracle we continue to outvote the 70+ million, the margins will be narrow, and the crazies will fight tooth and nail against whatever laws we manage to pass or policies we manage to put in place. Remember: it doesn’t take much to bring down the house. A population that includes a few percent of highly motivated crazies can make the country impossible to govern, democratically, for generations.
Mitch McConnell is a master crazy. His handling of the Garland nomination drove our judicial system off the cliff and he said it was the highlight of his career. He will pontificate and lie to his grave. He is not the adult in the room.
The Garland situation was not crazy though. It was a cold, ruthless maneuver to grab a level of power, and it turned out to be well-judged.
The Venn diagram between crazy and awful has some overlap, yes, but they are not mutually inclusive. Mitch McC IS the adult in the room. It's just a room of very, very awful people.
Yes, I think you’re right on McConnell’s mental state, but, I repeat, that is not the crux of the problem, which is that 70+ million American voters will do anything they can, including the dismantling of the US democracy, to put in place a government that will have, as a top priority, punishing people that the 70+ million don’t like. When they reach that goal, they will find themselves with a government that will put 90% of its people in a status simillar to that of medievsl serfs, albeit with different jobs. Most of them know this in their bones but still think it will be worth it, as long as they see the prople they don’t like persecuted by their government.
Agree ... Yes! Except with the last sentence, tho i used to believe it was precisely that. Beginning to see it a bit more thru a different lens.
At this point, it now seems to me that their real goal is to blow up the entire system because it never serves them at all. Instead, it messes them over, no matter who is 'in power.'
And that seems to be a function of their realizing on some level that our issues are not Right vs. Left. They are Up vs. Down. Establishment vs. Everyone Else. And they are looking to upset the Establishment and push them off the throne.
So yeah, they probably do wanna see those they don't like persecuted by their gov't. However, they're genuinely wanting and needing a country and gov't. that serves them... too. Just my evolving perspective.
I think your guess about the motivations of the white working class has a lot in common with mine: White, working-class Americans want a return to the system that was firmly in control from 1619 to 1965 because that system served them better than the one envisioned by 1960s legislation on civil rights, voting rights, affirmative action, and the like. The white working class opposes, by roughly a three-to-one margin, any diminishment of their enormous, systemic advantages. Archie Bunker made this clear. His view is their view, and it’s not irrational, but to believe that Archie Bunker’s view is anti-establishment would be irrational. This may be where your guess differs from mine about the motivations of white Americans. I think they consciously endorse the establishment. They vote for Republicans because that is the party that, since a couple decades after the Civil War, has provided a home for people who want to preserve (and increase!) systemic advantages for white Americans. A few Republicans may have lost their mojo for a few years in the 1960s. Maybe they mistakenly thought the passing of civil rights legislation was a long-term shift in the wind. They soon discovered the error, adopted the Southern Strategy in 1968, and have never looked back. White, working-class Americans who vote for Republicans understand this. They know the Republican Party is the establishment party, and they want Republicans in office who will flaunt the power of the establishment, not people who pay lip service to fair treatment for all Americans. Republicans in the lip-service business aren’t vicious enough for them. Republicans, including white, working-class Americans who vote for Republicans, are not irrational. Like all Republicans, they’re just stingy and mean.
Well, Steve, there may be a limit to what McConnell can stomach from his party's House crazies, but he hasn't reached it yet, at least not publicly. Compare his immediate post Jan. 6th speech against Trump's attempted coup with his vote not to convict Trump following the second impeachment. The only thing we can be sure of is that defeating Democrats is his main priority, perhaps his only priority.
Yerp. Time for our routine reminder that Mitch McC is a soulless crocodile who has mastered the low art of appearing comparatively calm and reasonable, just enough to get to gullible to set foot in the lake in time to have their chance of a decent livelihood chomped.
Absolutely true that McConnell will take whichever position keeps him and the GOP in power (and that's why he changed his tune after very few Republicans followed his lead post-Jan 6th), but there is no love lost between McConnell and Trump. If McConnell sees the House crazies as limiting his ability to hold power and influence, then he will oppose them.
If the Christian Nationalists want an authoritarian government to support their world views, let them move to Hungary or Russia. They don't need to f*ck up the US just because they are scared of diversity. What about religious freedom? No one is telling them they can't practice their religion, what gives them the idea that they can tell others how they can worship? Christ would roll over in his catacomb at the very smell of these people. I bet he wishes he could throw lightening bolts like Zeus did.
Well, I love it. How about THEY leave it? All the restriction they want to unpopularly enact to fix our "permissive" society are already in place in wonderful places like Afghanistan. Why don't they just move there and save themselves the effort. Or Nicaragua, if they want to save the boat fare.
Oh, wait. They probably only want somewhere like that where it's mostly WHITE people. And a Walmart within walking distance. Welp, I guess they're crud outta luck then, aren't they?
ON the very rare occasions that I enter a Walmart, trust me on this, Will: doesn't look like a lot of them do much walking. I do not mean that as an insult, just an observation I've made a number of times while waiting at the front of the store for my shopping companion.
Yes, Miselle, many disabled people shop at Walmart, because it is inexpensive. And they use the battery carts, or walk and move slowly. Is that what you meant by your rather odd comment?
It amazes me how some folks drum up their own morality while toting their ill-gotten gains to the bank. Looking at you, Rick Scott, TFG, the flying monkeys of the House of Representatives, et al. As an acquaintance once said, "When someone tells me they are a Christian businessman, I hold onto my wallet and run." From Rupert Murdoch to Putin to the Christian Nationalists, when will they see that, despite calling us socialists and worse, they delude themselves most of all.
Great comment, Hope. I especially liked:
"As an acquaintance once said, "When someone tells me they are a Christian businessman, I hold onto my wallet and run.""
"After coming into contact with a religious man I always feel I must wash my hands." Friedrich Nietzsche
That is an extreme position that aborts communication. On this planet there are businesses that embrace the Christian model that has not wandered too far from the “love thy neighbor...” thing. But news outlets don’t cover this.
Nor do I see cable news pundits discussing how trends in the Republican Party parallel the rise of Nazism.
I assure you it only seems extreme to those who worry their contact could evoke that response in others. To the rest of us, such feelings reflect generations of experience and millenia of history.
I do not patronize any business because of their religious views, but I do avoid many because of their sanctimonious proselytizing. It's disgusting.
Nor do I see any religious organizations denouncing the extreme right, instead just enjoying the ride on their coattails.
As Sam Smith points out so eloquently, it is the concentric circles of decreasing reason of "good" religious people by degree that ultimately makes the completely psycho religious people possible.
I see religious people rejecting hate and greed and counseling social awareness and compassion, as MLK did, but am disappointed that as a whole, there is so little visible "religious" protest (that I am aware of) of the cruel and narcissistic values of so many who claim to speak for their religion. I am not religious in any conventional sense, but I very much respect the values of some who are. Actions speak louder than words.
Your comment reminds me of the not-so-distant past, May of 2022, the Southern Baptist Convention published a list of hundreds of men in power positions who have been accused of sexual abuse. What happened to this list of hundreds? I'd like to know - the rats.
I recently found this organization: https://www.christiansagainstchristiannationalism.org/
Thinking today of Jimmy Carter, a religious man who has lived his principles. In addition, he put solar panels on the White House (which Ronald Reagan, who used tricks to get himself elected) took off.
Actions speak louder than words !
AMEN! "Ye SHALL KNOW Them!, ...by Their FRUITS!!
Many religious leaders in Portland were behind Measure 114, the gun law that voters passed here in Oregon and is currently being held up by a judge in eastern Oregon. The Oregon Supreme Court has declined to interfere until that plays out in that court.
I refuse to go into a Hobby Lobby because of their very vocal "look at me I am Christian".
They are also discriminatory and help finance a lot of intolerance. We have several places here in Salem where we will not darken the door that are local, but have made their pseudo-Christianity well known. One couple owns a couple restaurants and bragged about conning someone who asked if they had been vaccinated and they said yes because sometime as children they were for the usual things. They thought they were too clever by half. Liars and hypocrites.
Pamela, I refuse to step foot into a Hobby Lobby, too. The one near me went out of business, and I was thrilled. Did you know that they purchased plundered antiquities (from Iraq?), knowing their origins, and imported them to this country by describing them as "tiles"? I'm fuzzy about the details, but think they had to surrender them and pay restitution. In my opinion, they should have been forbidden to conduct business as a penalty. Oh, and then there's their refusal to pay for employee insurance that would have covered birth control.
Where I live, Ithaca NY, Hobby Lobby went under because enough people did as you did
same, Pamela ... for years now!
I agree that religious institutions rarely remind the public of the core of Christianity which is to love in the ways suggested in biblical texts.
I also think that theocracies generally are oppressive.
I personally have the good fortune to be part of a local church that very much embraces the core values I mentioned above.
Me, I love the art of argument but I have found that persuasion is better. To further that shift I have to be better at first finding common ground, find a way to validate the other person, walk alongside rather than go nose to nose trading glares.
I like peace too. Best wishes John Rochat
Thank you, though your comment about peace reminded me of a particularly egregious saying - "Know Jesus, Know Peace, No Jesus, No Peace" which appears to be more of an action plan. I have yet to meet any religious person who demonstrated any moral advantage over any good person of no religious indoctrination. Consider that religious beliefs are essentially determined completely by where we are born and little else. Every Christian I know (I grew up evangelical) would adamantly deny they could be Hindu or Muslim if simply born in a different part of the world, but will confidently say Hindu and Muslim peoples are "lost." Lol.
The (over)focus on white evangelical Christians does tend to obscure the truth that what makes the right-wing (white-wing?) movement so awful is not unique to evangelicals, or Christians, or religious people in general. Authoritarian movements appear not only in religions but in secular ideologies (Nazism and Stalinism for starters), and often when they arise they have widespread popular appeal.
Religious authoritarians have a head start because they can claim that their ideologies are underwritten by God. Secular authoritarians may adopt a religious veneer ("Kinder, Küche, Kirche") but they often turn into personality cults where a man (almost invariably it is a man) stands in for the deity.
I'm fascinated (as well as somewhat terrified) by the apotheosis of Donald Trump. On so many counts he's the antithesis of what the white-wing evangelicals claim to value and believe. I'm daring to believe that he's the fault line, the (I hope) fatal flaw in this home-grown fascist movement -- the fracturing of the GOP as we head toward 2024 suggests as much. But a whirlwind has been unleashed, and it's a long way from behing tamed.
*Sorry, Sam Harris
John, you now can edit on Substack! Click on the three dots (…) at the end of the line below your comment and voilà: those pesky typos can be fixed anon 😁
Yes. Moderate religious people shield the extremists.
Sam Harris
Here is a link to a talk in Minneapolis in January 2023 by Dr. Michael Emerson on his research that looks at the beliefs of Practicing White Christians (PWC). They are people who say they are Christian, who say their faith is extremely important to them, and they attend worship at least once per month. Emerson is a sociologist at Univ. of North Carolina. His book on this research is "The Grand Betrayal: The Agonizing Story of Religion, Race, and Rejection in American Life." His lecture starts at about minute 37. This was sponsored by the Minnesota Council of Churches, and the news of his survey findings is spreading. In essence, PWCs interpret biblical passages in ways that are incongruous with the meaning of biblical faith which teaches, among other things, that we should care for the foreigner, confess our own sin, etc. There is much more here: https://youtu.be/KtnmxSYH_vM
Shall look. Your American “Christianity” makes me keep a bucket near by. Emerson probably travels with a bucket handy. And the term practising white Christian’s is as much an oxymoron as … you think it up.
The problematic word in PWC is "white" because it is the group of white people in the survey (among all Christians) who registered the most positive emotions about White Privilege and the most negative emotions around Social Justice, Reparations, Undocumented Immigrants. These views are found across the board among Roman Catholics, mainline Protestants, and evangelicals who are white. So what's disturbing, Anne, is that PWCs are not only the evangelical conservative MAGAs we might think. And the bucket-worthy survey results are not explained by political party affiliation, age, residence, gender, etc. It's just about being white.
Thanks for the link
Thanks for the link. Besides confirming my fears this lasso shows that other Christians are organizing to provide a counterweight. Rock on…
Mary, when you are presented with a "Christian religious man" who tells everyone around him that gayfolk are an abomination of God, please tell me why John's quote of Nietzsche "is an extreme position that aborts communication". Please tell me how that is different from people who tell me they "hate the sin but love the sinner". How does one "communicate" with someone who believes they are an abomination and a sinner because of what some "god" said?
I agree that that is a problem and that quote has been used to justify oppression, hatred and violence. But I believe that that problem does not nullify all of Christian scripture. If I ever converse with someone who clutches that problem to his or her breast I would still try to talk about it to
Probably because they are in parallel. Read the history.
My first reaction to this quote was to chuckle and agree. Because the damage done by "religions" is arguably much greater than the good they are supposed to represent. Many of today's Bible Thumpers are terrifyingly dangerous.
But then I remind myself that as soon as we make sweeping generalizations about any group of people (except Trumpers and Nazis, etc.) we have demonstrated ignorance.
I don't have a religious bone in my body. I would tax every "church". I think that most megachurch preachers are as trustworthy as George Santos. I think it would be appropriate for the Roman Catholic church to declare itself an enemy of mankind and sell its assets to feed the poor. The Russian Orthodox version should be sent to the gulags for supporting Putin the monster. I could go on....
However, I know many people who consider themselves religious who are exemplary human beings. The fact that they have another take on faith just means they have another opinion. I still honor them for the complete humans they are - despite believing that their "faiths" are silly superstitions. I work with what people do. How do they treat others? That is all that matters to me.
That being said, the religious people who are well intentioned - accepting of all people regardless of faith or lack thereof, regardless of gender identity, color, cultural background or political views - those people, that you and I might get along with, have been way too silent. An exception, whose following I hope is growing, is John Pavlovitz. https://johnpavlovitz.com/
You will find some mighty fine people in this comments forum who are on the correct side of democracy, diversity, social justice and all around fairness. And many of them have some sort of religious faith. One is a "chaplain". I stand with them because we share core values about how we should treat people.
Love John. But, about half way into the trump years I had to stop reading his work. I had really started to despise trump voters. So now I read him periodically. He's a really good man!
Thanx for mentioning my pastor John Pavlovitz.
(Yes, the dichotomous Atheist has a pastor, just like the Non-Catholic has a patron St. Francis.)
My Jewish wife and I toured parts of Italy. Every city or large town had a duomo. Painted on the interiors were scenes of torture. People being speared, roasted and dismembered. Except for the duomo in Assisi. My wife said: "I like this guy Francis. "Franny" can be my saint". She is an animal lover, so that helped, as well.
He could be a secular saint. He sort of bucked the Catholic Church and came close to heresy. He would be forgotten today if killed by the Inquisition for heresy, but prevailed and became the gentle Saint, embraced by animal lovers and non-religious seekers.
My partner and I took off on our pilgrimage on October 4, 1975 and learned later that was the Feast of St. Francis. Synchronicity?
"...the religious people who are well intentioned ... have been way too silent."
I disagree, emphatically. They are not so much silent as unheard: ignored as not relevant and thus not quoted. That's on us, buried in our own silo that divides people into handy representational categories. Not all religious people carry a flag that says so. Maybe we need to open ourselves up to be receptive.
It's true that they don't make the headlines because they aren't outrageous. You are right. It's on us to listen. I'll work harder on that.
But to break through in this world, we need to do something attention grabbing. Maybe a big electric F-150 pickup with a flag of Jesus (black version, of course) with the words "Proud Democrat"?
We just have to get out of our own silos and pay attention to what is really going on instead of just assuming we already know. Not sure flying a flag is going to help out a lot with that. It's still letting the extremists set the standard. Let's face the other way and pay closer attention to who else is working with us that we are too blind to see. Or hear.
I've toyed with the idea of flying the National Colors and the Pride flag from my half-ton pickup (sadly, not electric). But I'm not sure how safe I'd be.
Although I belong to a different Faith, "Faithful America" is a wonderful group of Christians who are fighting peacefully and having an affect, against Christian Nationalist. They are against the extremist who have twisted the teachings of Christ. Please check them out, they need support. I'm sadly not tech savvy to put a link.
FaithfulAmerica.org
I think you mean this one:
https://faithfulamerica.org/
David, I was about to say that, too. You and Hope beat me to it. I've always known that I was in good company here in Heather's Herd, and that belief has been reinforced.
The good news, to me, is that these insane bigots on the extreme right are finally spelling out their plans in public. I hope that we won't be disappointed at the reaction of every sane person in this country.
Nancy, My guess is that we won’t be disappointed, presuming we respond proactively. To clarify, in my view, the outcome of future elections could land primarily on how effectively Biden and Democratic leadership manage the upheaval much of the GOP feasts on. Democrats need to lead in this moment when GOP far-right extremists are fueling hate and division. They have to go where the trouble is in this country, the trouble the GOP extremists are stoking, the trouble said extremists are making worse. Democrats must go there and meet with the people who doubt that Democrats care about the wreckage of their dreams and show they can work on legitimate issues and grievances.
I agree, Barbara Jo. I don't understand why so many people don't already know the valuable things that Biden has accomplished, and my guess is that it is due to the fact that Biden is not a charismatic speaker. His life-long speech impediment has hampered his ability to get past many peoples' affinity for style above substance.
Nancy, While I mostly agree with your thoughts about Biden, please note that when I wrote, “They [Dems] have to go where the trouble is…” I was speaking about our local, state, and federal representatives. Moreover, I wasn’t expecting these officials merely to enumerate the accomplishments of the past two years, which, compliments of Manchin and Sinema, were dramatically edited down. Instead, I expect Democrats authentically to empathize with legitimate grievances and inequities and to demonstrate their commitment to implementing meaningful change.
Yes, Barbara Jo, local politics is essential to any real progress. I agree, too, that the Democrats need to listen and help everyone who's aggrieved and hurting.
Be nice if MSM. did their jobs as well as Rupert spews hate and division
Jeri, While I don’t disagree with your assessment of much of MSM and have served as a lay media critic for some time, I also believe in pressing our Democratic representatives to do a better job of messaging both their agenda and the harms and injustices each time it is blocked.
Absolutely, the Dems are awful at messaging - from "defund the police" on. It looks as though Biden's trying.
Amen to that!
The real concern is how many are NOT sane! And vote.
The number of sane people is the problem.
“Half of republicans” (supporting “Christian” nationalism) is indeed a lot of people, but what proportion of the total voting population is that now - 20%,25%?
Heavy turnout of "sane" voters in '22 made the difference between having a red tsunami and a pink trickle. Fingers crossed.
This line bothered me too. Per 2022 Gallup polls of party affiliation, ~28% identify as Republicans; 30% as Dem, 40% Independent. MSM routinely disingenuously frames Dem/Repub split like it is 50-50. The article that HCR referenced says "According to the PRRI/Brookings study, only 10% of Americans view themselves as adherents of Christian nationalism and about 19% of Americans said they sympathize with these views."
Those numbers are still very concerning and require that we all draw attention to this dangerous threat in our society with friends and via any platform we have because 81% of Americans are NOT among the crazies.
Yes, it’s still a lot of people And important to try to counteract. Thanks for calling attention to the reference, I hadn’t checked. Who knew Marjorie Taylor Greene was a Christian, though? Not real noticeable, imho.
David “Onward Christian businessmen
Coming forth to steal,
Why should we pay taxes
To pay for a poor folk meal?’
What Nancy Fleming said, directly below!
Perfect, and funny, too, Keith.
Thank you David. I am pleased we are LFAA friends.
Me too! You keep putting smiles on my face.
Are you referring to Letters From An American? 👍🏼
Yes
Yup
Had to be!!
We have a particularly sleazy developer right here in River City (Salem, OR) that touts his Christianity. My neighbor, when she finds out someone is a fundamentalist, says watch your back. Yes, run, don't walk. I also reminded of another person, neighbor of my in-laws who made much of his Christianity. And he called us at night to ask my husband, who worked at Employment, to somehow make things work for him. My husband refused. Then later one, he commented to me at a party at my in-laws that the neighborhood had changed, meaning that it was no longer lily white. I just smiled and said yes, it is more diverse. This turkey and all the others have no idea of who Jesus was or what he said in the first three Gospels.
So you're saying you got trouble?
Right there? In River City?
*ducks out of the way of splatting tomatoes*
Yes they do. Here in Eugene, too, and it ain't spelled "pool"!
Gotta keep our children moral after school!
I tell ya people we got TROUBLE, terrible terrible, trouble, with a capital P & that does stands for Pool!
Are there words creeping into your son's conversation? Words like "swell" and "so's your old man?"
MASS-STERIA!!!
Oregon is a weird critter when it comes to its attitude regarding anyone not white. We removed racist language from our constitution in 2002 and repealed the section of our constitution that permitted slavery or involuntary servitude as punishment for a crime just this last year. There were "sundown towns" in Oregon as late as the 1960's. Our racist roots run deep and no "whitewashing" will change that.
With that in mind, larger metropolitan areas are better than smaller towns, but there is still awful discrimination and harassment that goes on for BIPOC. I have become friendly with women who run two restaurants in town (one Vietnamese and one Chinese) and both have had their businesses targeted for vandalism in the past several years. A big problem in Eugene in particular is that the global "we" (of liberal white folks) think we are more racially equitable than we really are, which isn't very...
Damn funny!
This is interesting. I'm sure glad I don't run into people like this in Massachusetts. I'm a bit disappointed in Oregon, which was the third state I was ever in. (My parents had friends outside of Portland, and we'd drive from Seattle.)
I am always amazed at what people will say when they think they are talking to someone who is as prejudiced as they are. My husband has Lakota ancestry, for example, but a lot of people don't know that. I made up my mind about racism when I was about seven and have not changed since although I had and still have a lot to learn. I did spend three and half years in Sierra Leone (student at Fourah Bay and Peace Corps) and when I came back, I have to say people here looked very pale and not quite healthy. We also have people here in Salem who keep track of the efforts of the fundamentalists and often video what they see....yes, taking a risk. Now we have a bill in the legislature that will make it very difficult for militias like the Proud Boys to harass and intimidate. The gun nuts oppose it, but I do hope it passes.
There's a really awesome guy on Twitter - Lakota Man - who more than 456K followers. Cool dude.
I've run into Lakota man--yes, good guy!
I sure hope it passes, too.
David, having been born and raised in the Boston suburbs, my experience was that there was plenty of similar conduct there. Evangelicals weren't prevalent, but I had many neighbor children tell me that I was going to hell because I was of a different Christian denomination than they were, and one schoolteacher informed the school principal when he referred to me as "little Irish eyes" that I was no such thing, as someone in my family was a "fence-jumper," as I attended the Episcopal church. Evangelical bigotry and hypocrisy in Georgia takes on a different tone, but all of it has the same basis, and none of it bears any resemblance to the spirit of Christianity.
By the way, one child who predicted that my fate would be hellfire ended up being a huge fan of tFg. Surprised?
My Dad's father was Jewish, his mother Catholic. Very Catholic. IRISH Catholic. So the kids could do Hannukah but would go to Bible study. Fair enough.
Dad recently told me that one day some nun in Sunday school was going on about how non-believers are never saved. He went home a bit upset, related it to my Nana, and asked, "but what about Daddy?" Nana got the sternest look he'd ever seen, and simply, flatly stated, "ALL GOOD people go to Heaven."
The kids never went to Sunday school again.
As a "non-Catholic" 4th grader in parochial school, the nun proclaimed that my deceased father's soul was likely not to have made it to heaven. I subsequently stayed home because had a stomach ache for 3 days. My mother, who rarely took my side, eventually called the nun and said something like "just give her an education and leave out the editorial stuff".
This began my long love - hate relationship with religion. (I still love the teachings about love.)
I just had to look this up again, for it is one of the most moving things I have ever seen: https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2018/04/16/my-dad-heaven-little-boy-asks-pope
It is amazing to me that anyone could actually purport to know, with any certainty, what God would want, what God decides, or even what God looks like. I myself don't believe in God per se, but neither do I disbelieve, because how could any human ever know for sure. Anyone who purports to know these details just strikes me as wanting to, you know... play God.
From the Crusades, to torturing thinkers like Galileo during the inquisition to "re-educating" indigenous children and ruining their lives, the Church has a lot to answer for, as do many organized religions. Even today, many forbid birth control (a la Justices Thomas and Alito) so that there will be more contributors when the offering plate is passed. Like you, I believe in being kind and contributing to the welfare of all, but I gave up on organized religion (even the moderate Episcopal church) years ago.
Good for Nana! Clearly, she hadn't been thoroughly indoctrinated, which was a good thing for her children.
Not surprised by that last sentence. I missed most of the hellfire and damnation, probably partly as a result of going to a Quaker elementary school, and living in a housing development full of professors and similar. Oddly, my best friend in second grade, though Jewish, had had a friend before we met who was hellfire and damnation Christian. So, for example, my best friend got me to go to Saturday school with him, by saying, "It might make the difference between whether you're up there with those angels or down there with those devils." I was surprised when I went to Saturday school with him that there was no mention of hellfire and damnation, not even a hint of it. It was just a pleasant small group, coloring, and hearing some judaism related stories.
After second grade, we moved away, and I didn't see this guy again until I looked him up after graduating from college. He had only the vaguest memory of me, (oh, wait, he said, after five minutes of my explaining who I was and how we'd done everything together in secoind grade, "did your family live at the top of the hill and have an orange station wagon?" (That was indeed us.) And he had no recollectoin of the hellfire and damnation, and as far as I could tell he wasn't religious.
Where you lived and went to school was definitely a factor. For years, I thought that if we'd lived in the Back Bay or a similar area my experience would have been much different. As a young teen, I had many Jewish friends, and there was none of the hellfire and damnation conversation common with my Catholic (mostly Irish) friends. Much better that your long-ago friend recalled your family's orange station wagon rather than any hellfire and damnation. I'm also impressed with his second grade understanding of the choice of "up there with those angels or down there with those devils."
I must confess that despite my "friend" warning me of my destiny to burn in hell, I asked my parents if I could go to parochial school. I wasn't worried (just insulted) about the hell prediction, but "sister" school had the advantage (to me) of a later start to the school year in the Fall, an earlier end in Spring, lots of holy days off during the year, and I was fascinated by the nuns' garb - especially the veils. The downside was that nuns had the reputation of smacking your knuckles with a ruler for infractions, but I believed that my good behavior and good grades would probably exempt me from punishment. Fortunately, my mother and father (who left the Catholic church as a teenager, thus the "fence jumper" described by my 5th grade teacher) weren't having any of my pleas of attending parochial school, so I continued in the more rigorous public school system.
I was a bit surprised that Ralphie didn't remember that the station wagon was a '57 Chevy. Ralphie forgot stuff because his father had died when he was six, I think. He never talked to me about that, but my mother did. Ralphie's father had had two heart attacks, and at some point he told my mother, "my father was lucky the first time." (And my mother told me--she thought, probably rightly, that that statement was very signficant.)
Ralphie's mother was a noted interior decorator in Seattle, did work for John Ehrlichman, among others, and drove a Thunderbird. His grandfather had been a founder of Nordstrom's (this was Seattle), and Ralphie was an incredibly precocious kid. One weekend day, we were hanging around where there were swings and such, and some Black girls were there, too (this was academic year 1960-61). I referred to them as negroes, and Ralphie said, "don't call them that. It's not nice." One of them responded, "but that's what we are". He also married a woman he met in college, and they're almost certainly still married.
I don't know when Ralphie gave up the hellfire and damnation, but I'm sure he had totally forgotten about it by the time we met after college.
Not surprised.
Hi David,
I live in "MetroWest". But I spent my first 50 years in Western Mass. It was a great place to grow up. A lot more space. More of the "natural world". But there are patches of scary people out there. More than a few big pickups with huge American flags and Trump stickers. Pockets of hate. I feel much safer here.
They are here in the South Shore of Boston too. They look so foolish.
Oy. Funny, my best friend lives outside Albany NY, and I now take the back roads when I visit him and his SO, meaning Rt. 2 all the way to Williamstown and then either 2 to Albany or a couple of way-back roads through Powlan VT (the extreme southwest corner of that state) and then up to 7 in NY, which goes almost all the way to my friend's--and no trumpiness--and least none that I've seen. I HAVE seen a bit of trumpiness when taking other backroads, which I've occasionally done.
People think “Portland” when they hear of Oregon....there is SO much more out there, of the right-wing extremist variety. Same as CA, where I am from originally...again, it’s not all SF and LA...very red areas. And now we live in AZ!🤪
I live in Boise. Now a huge swath of Eastern Oregon wants to become Idaho because Oregon isn't racist enough.
Yes, have read about this movement😡
And I have friends in the Willamette Valley that want us to do that as well.
Michele, I grow up in Salem, OR.
I agree when I see a sign in a business with “in god we trust” I head the other way knowing that I am (pardon the language) screwed.
Don't forget the sentence that follows "In God we trust." "All others pay cash,"
Exactly. Because if you pay in cash, they can “forget” to report it to the IRS.
Our “Constitutional” Sheriff put “ In God We Trust” on the back of all the patrol cars.
That would make me completely insane and I would have to start a revolution!
That disturbs me greatly. Unless he also put "All others checked through NCIC" but I strongly doubt he'd do that.
NCIC is the national clearinghouse for holding warrants on wanted folks, stolen things, and other items of police inquiry.
In God We Trust. All others pay cash. Wasn’t that originally coined by the Three Wise Men: Neiman. Marcus, and Macy?
Just as (back in the days of yellow pages ads being where you looked to find stuff) I stayed away from the "fish" that was so prevalent a time back.
When I was a kid I always saw those fish on the backs of people's cars.
I thought it was a chill way to communicate they liked surfing.
HA! I love that! Oh, you say you're from Cal? Who could have guessed? ;)
I bought my nephew (a pagan) one of those that had legs and a tail and read "Darwin" in the middle...
I like your younger self's translation of that!!
North Carolina has I think 3 background choices for automobile license plates. One is "In God We Trust". I always select "First in Flight".
I've seen igwt on several plates; most commonly Utah, but I think I've seen it in one of the "I" states. Indiana maybe?
Then I did a Google search and found this:
https://www.blitzwatch.org/in-god-we-trust-license-plates#:~:text=Current%20Status-,%E2%80%9CIn%20God%20We%20Trust%E2%80%9D%20license%20plates%20are%20already%20available%20in,%2C%20West%20Virginia%2C%20and%20Wisconsin.
All, thank you for posting that. I had no idea and will definitely spread the word. Horrifying.
It was pretty disturbing to me.
Translated, it means:
"IN THI$ WE TRUST"
I ran the other way when the local interior design studio posted an “I Support the Second” sticker. Huh?
"the flying monkeys of the House of Representatives"...and their lying flunkies.
Good one!
" As an acquaintance once said, "When someone tells me they are a Christian businessman, I hold onto my wallet and run."
While I was still in junior high, I figured out that the guys who bragged the loudest about their "conquests" were the guys who couldn't get a date if they had Cyrano de Bergerac writing their material.
Same with the folks who find it necessary to tout their "Christianity" with bells, whistles, banners and horns. They apparently missed this admonition in Matthew 6:5-6:
"“And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. 6 But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you."
Because to them, it's the appearance that matters, not the substance.
Ah yes, praying loudly in the Temple. I always look at actions and not words.
In 2010, as a retired engineer with more than 30 years in heavy industry I volunteered as the "owners representative" to head up a major addition to our Episcopal church. At that point I had lots of experience with contractors both great and crooked and in between. I was working with another engineer who had been in technical sales representing the church, and we were meeting with various contractors. We sat down with one contractor, in his conference room and the first thing he had to do was open the meeting with prayer. We were not there to pray, we were there to talk about technical details and cost. This was our last meeting with this contractor.
We found another contractor from about 60 miles away who was outstanding. These were tough times for the building trades but the measure of the great contractor was how he treated his people not the show he put on.
By the way that "praying" contractor got caught praying on customers and went bankrupt.
You had me at “flying monkeys of the House of Representatives,” 😂😂😂
"the flying monkeys of the House of Representatives" I love it. :)
Another sign to make you run away - a large pickup truck in the south with a Christian fish emblem stuck on the tailgate, and a confederate flag bolted onto the front bumper. Saw one yesterday.
James Sounds like a bipolar Republican. There’s no Jesus in that message.
Janet “Fish got to swim
and birds got to fly
As Lake Powell dries up
Even Boebert is gonna die.”
And they voted in a very conflicted and very confused congressperson. Shame on them. IT weakens our democracy.
Religion is and always has been about power. Dostoevsky's Grand Inquisitor said it perfectly. “There exists no greater or more painful anxiety for a man who has freed himself from all religious bias, than how he shall soonest find a new object or idea to worship. But man seeks to bow before that only which is recognized by the greater majority, if not by all his fellow-men, as having a right to be worshipped; whose rights are so unquestionable that men agree unanimously to bow down to it. For the chief concern of these miserable creatures is not to find and worship the idol of their own choice, but to discover that which all others will believe in, and consent to bow down to in a mass.”
Here is Sir John Gielgud playing the Grand Inquisitor: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om6HcUUa8DI
Love the term and image of “flying monkeys”! Brings to minds scene in the “Wizard of Oz”
Thanks, Nancy. That is exactly where I got the image. I couldn't recall what they were called. "Harpies" I think. But Harpies are a different creature all together.
AHEM! Run
Hope I was so gobsmacked by your ‘flying monkeys’ imagery that I couldn’t immediately baboonsil my way through the remainder of your spot-on commentary.
Hi Keith! Alas, I am not too original. The image comes from The Wizard of Oz (which fits our current times in so many ways!) A big "heart" to you.
Hope From the Wizard of Oz I realized that balloons had a will of their own. At 11 I had a Coke with Frank Morgan on his yacht. To me he didn’t seem to be a malevolent balloonist.
I can’t say the same about Xi and/or his military sycophants with their ‘intelligence balloons.’
"Their own morality", as you so aptly put it, seems to be the result of way too little time reading history. As in, when the Pope owned the world, Church of England, & on & on...
From R. Scott via HCR; " But it also reflected the turn toward Christian nationalism, centering Christianity and “Judeo-Christian values” by investing in religious schools, adoption agencies, and social services and calling for an end to abortion, gender-affirming care, and diversity training. It explicitly puts religion above the law, saying “Americans will not be required to go against their core values and beliefs in order to conform to culture or government.”
Seems to me that Christian belief is centered on the concept of 'one true God', which is a faith based (and unprovable by mere humans) notion. It's a good thing in context. Except the Repubs want to put the unprovable above the law. Then, only the "leaders"will be able to make policy. Only they will be able to fix it. The religious texts of the leaders' choice will become scripture. And then, the Repubs will finally get their cummuppance.
Dan I believe that religion is a matter of personal faith. It can neither be proved or disproved by ‘facts.’ For ‘Christians,’ presumably they believe in the teachings of Jesus: love, forgiveness, and turn the other cheek. (Also that a rich man has a very slim chance of going to heaven.)
If they reject this, then I do not consider them ‘Christians.’
Each religion has its own name for 'God'. Jesus, Jehovah, Buddha, whatever. The thing religions forget is that all of these represent pure LOVE. They need to focus on that rather than their rules and man-made commandments that are the cause of so much hate and war.
Debbie Before humans ‘formalized’ religion, ‘God’ was acknowledged in agriculture, the sun, water, and in ‘birth mothers.’ Only around 3,000 BCE do we start finding historical evidence of formal religion—often linked to political power [Egypt, Ur].
Some modern religions have a diversity of ‘Gods.’ In Judaism, the diversity of ‘Gods’ was reduced to one god about 700 BCE. In Christianity there was focus on Jesus being the ‘son of God.’ While Jesus symbolized love, this was not my impression of the ‘God’ of the Old Testament.
I guess my point is that virtually every religion depicts its 'God' as love. Yet they get all tangled up in their rules and exceptions to who is worthy of love and who we should hate because they don't follow our particular set of rules, etc., etc., etc., that 'love' is hardly visible.
Well said.
Upcoming election in Wisconsin for election of justice on state Supreme Court. Important for Democracy. Participate.
From Politics Girl, Leigh McGowan on making a difference in Wisconsin. And our country.
https://youtu.be/NWoWDQsLM7g
I signed up several days ago!
"flying monkeys" is perfect!
Your letter brings home once again how vital it is that we push back and hold at bay the Christo-fascists!
Jane,
"Your letter brings home once again how vital it is that we push back and hold at bay the Christo-fascists!"
Maybe.
But, the train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, was not caused by Christo-fascists. It was caused by the degradation of Obama era regulations on train safety that were removed during the Trump administration through effective "lobbying" accepted by non-Christo-fascists in Congress and by Norfolk Southern management's willingness to prioritize profit over all aspects of train transport.
In other words: The real threat in America is:
A Governmental model in this country that looks more like Prostitution than Democracy.
In short: I will call the governmental model in the US: Democratic Prostitution.
Those two words MOST accurately reflect the government model actually in use in the United States of America.
And, the current drumbeat from Fox News focusing NOT on the causes of the train derailment itself but on the EPA response? Nobody at Fox News is a Christo-fascist.
But everyone at FOX IS a Capitalist extremist and in full support of purchasing as many politicians as possible (lobbying) to get them to do their bidding. There it is again: Democratic Prostitution.
Likewise. Drug prices are not astronomical because of Christo-fascists.
Drug prices are high, and hospital stays are (now) profoundly expensive because Pharmaceutical companies prioritize profit over all aspects of health care and hospitals are now all owned mostly by hedge funds that also prioritize profit over the health of anyone at all.
And? The reason the two above facts exist is because of effective lobbying in Congress by Capitalist extremists who prefer a governmental model that looks more like prostitution than democracy. Democratic Prostitution again is the model for government here.
So, I would like to introduce what everyone already knows: Religious extremism is particularly easy to demonize because it is real, and, yes, some rich folks want private schools (mostly so that they don't have to go to integrated schools with black folks honestly).
BUT, the real problem in America is Capitalist Extremism that has led to a Governmental Model called: Democratic Prostitution.
Democratic Prostitution NOT Christian extremism/Christo-fascism is the threat we face most.
I rush to say: Sometimes, and more frequently of late, Capitalist Extremism in the form of Democratic Prostitution and Christo-fascist rhetoric overlap, in particular, with junk Christianity called "Prosperity Gospel".
But, that is (so far) a minority of Christians.
Fox “News” may not believe a word they speak, they may be doing it all for money, but they are in fact promoting the self-called-Christian authoritarians. Mussolini, who knew fascism, once said it should have been called corporatism. So it’s both. My only problem with your snappy label, is that in today’s environment too many will think it describes Democrats and not Republicans.
Interesting take on Democratic Prostitution. Prostitutes need money to live on. Without the insane political system where politicians can't run a campaign without a ton of money, which make them beholding to their donors. It is impossible to see a problem where money is not at the root. (of all evil). A healthcare industry that is profit motivated is nuts. There is nothing wrong with lobbying the government. The problem is when big $ wants something from the government they have politicians who NEED their $. Public financing and eliminate large donations might help. If running for office did not require large sums of money thing might look differently.
But since when is health care an “industry”? Has the Hippocratic Oath lost all meaning? Isn’t it time that we have free medical schools for qualified applicants? And maybe it’s also time to outlaw hedge funds which are causing so much damage to so many while contributing nothing of which I am aware. (Someone can correct me on that?)
Agree. Except healthcare in America did become an industry in America when, in the 1930's, private physicians invented illness insurance so they could be paid more than a sack of potatoes and a chicken for their services. And hospitals and nursing homes, many started by well intentioned physicians and nuns, became more capitalistic toys for hedge funders like Mitt Romney who squeezed out any extra funds (I won't say "profits" because most are non-profits), and regular revenues, firing "excess" employees, requiring remaining ones to do overtime to make up the difference this hustle created. Yes, there should be a law - MANY EFFECTIVE LAWS AGAINST THIS THIEVERY:
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/greed-and-debt-the-true-story-of-mitt-romney-and-bain-capital-183291/
Couldn’t agree more. Who is really happy that we want to help Ukraine? The corporations that will rake in billions in war profits. They are the ones in the rooms where decisions are made. Who was just happy to have a pandemic for a few years? The profiteers who were in the rooms where the decisions were made (under both Republican and Democratic administrations). Make America really great again-especially if it’s manufactured overseas for more profit.
Well, that might be part of it (the ill-gotten gains of the military-industrial complex), but as a Latvian I also know that this *is* about a rules-based international order. I was angry at Obama regarding his response to Crimea and predicted the war in Ukraine. Moldova, Poland and the Baltics will be next. Putin has never been shy about his obsession with restoring the USSR. Of course, this will lead us into WW3; we - and our allies - need to control Putin’s aggression or we are REALLY in danger.
Both things can be true. Profits will be made and democracies will lose if Ukraine is not supported.
Yes, that was the first thing I said.
I am really happy that we want to help Ukraine even with the war profits, of which I am very much aware. Helping Ukraine is helping Europe, our first western cultural center, and helping US keep democracy alive.
Why do you call it Democratic prostitution when it is the Republican side of the aisle that set up the flood of corporate money corrupting our elections? I saw a bumper sticker the other day that said,”In America , it’s lobbying. In the rest of the world, it is graft and corruption.” Corporations can no longer give legislators dinners, and cigars. But they can give them as much unidentified campaign money as they want. This happened when John Roberts agreed to make it the law of the land that a corporate entity was a person, right? What do you think would be the best way to stop the flood of anonymous money into campaign coffers at all levels of government, which is the only way I can see to push the “playing field back toward some semblance of level”?
Ideally, pass Adam Schiff's proposed Constitutional Amendment to repeal the Citizens United decision. Since that's not happening in my lifetime, support Senator Whitehouse's DISCLOSE bill that would put some daylight onto the 'dark money' being poured into campaigns.
Good post. Thanks!
Mike S. I mostly agree, but do not underestimate the power of the Christo-fascists. Their numbers are growing with the aid of Mike Flynn, and their fanaticism is strong.
Flynn is SO DANGEROUS.
Extremely dangerous!
If they are voting and they get enough others to vote with them than that is democracy in action yes?
As Republicans talk of Judeo-Christian values, the incidence of violent antisemitic attacks is exploding. Call it what it is antiJew-Christian values.
You are right to use the term Christofascists, a term I first heard Carolyn Baker use. It encompasses the reality of authoritarian white male control over other beliefs, basically. Can anyone doubt its inherent values of racism, sexism, homophobia, anti-semitism, deliberate ignorance, and greed? Nevertheless, it's a loaded term that folks aren't quite ready to contemplate. But go for it, Jane! It certainly fits.
I first used the term "Christofascists" a few years back while arguing with my MAGAt cousin. It really made her angry, but because she was a Texan, "Y'all Qaeda" made her even angrier.
It makes me kind of sad now, because she was one of the Covid casualties last year (she got sick at the end of 2021) and we used to be close. But I still think the terms were kind of appropriate in the context of our conversation, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
I'm sorry that your cousin passed from Covid, Karen. Was she a no vaxer? If so, that is one among many reasons the MAGAs pursue their mad goals while causing their own demise (literally!)
Thanks.
I suspect that she was a no-vaxxer. She and I had had a falling out over tfg, and I didn't even realize that she had died until I happened to look at her Facebook page just before what would have been her 81st birthday last May. I only found out the tiny bit I did by messaging her daughter.
It's very sad. And I blame that selfish orange narcissistic asshole. Covid never should have been politicized in any way.
Oh my, that is so sad. I hope you are okay. Yes, I too blame tfg for the million plus deaths under his watch. I too have learned of deaths by Facebook. It feels bizarre, frankly.
And so heartbreaking.
Wow. What a Letter, Professor Richardson. I am reeling from the implications. The extremist wing of the Republican Party is at its inflection point and is now quite dangerous.
I’d like to take Senator Voldemort, while at his helm as governor of Florida caused suffering amongst human beings, straight to the woodshed and throttle him. And then follow with DeSantis. Florida has become a stain on the map of the UNITED States of America. How dare they become a blatant autocratic warship. They can go f*ck themselves and their white, racist agenda of christian nationalism. There is nothing of ethical and human value within its rotten framework.
Thank you for your Letters from an American. I know where truth shines.
Salud!
🗽
Christian nationalists like to refer to “Judeo-Christian values” and I am taking this opportunity to tell you how angry I feel whenever I see this term used! Most Jews do not - and I emphasize not - connect ourselves to “Judeo-Christian values."
I think that term may have been used as an effort to show that Christianity was a natural outgrowth of Judaism and had led to it. Although there are values that both religions share, Judaism is a distinct and separate religion.
Our views about abortion, separation of church and state, rights of LGBTQ+ members of society etc. differ from those of Christian nationalists and many fundamental Christian sects.
I'll be curious if anyone else shares my views and concerns.
I am not Jewish, but I agree with both your views and your concerns. They have no idea of what they are talking about. I also do not want to live in a theocracy.
Yes, for example, it is my understanding in Jewish law the life of the existing human, the woman, takes priority over the life of the potential human being, the fetus. The extreme anti-abortion laws of the Christian Nationalists put the life of the fetus over the right to life of the mother in all cases. I suppose that is because half of the fetuses are male.
What I've read recently is that, according to Jewish law (it could just be tradition, and not law since that's not my area of expertise) until the first breath is drawn, a fetus is not considered to be a human being.
That used to be the Christian notion as well. It has been politicized. And here's to Fr. Robert Drinan, a pro life Catholic priest, who was my representative to the House for a good while. RIP.
America: where your rights begin at the GENDER REVEAL PARTY! Specialty cakes on sale now with your choice of organic* food coloring!
I always read the expression "Judeo-Christian" as a facile portmanteau shield against accusations of anti-semitism, essentially meaningless.
The point is that it is neither meaningless nor benign.
Mina -- As a Jew (and fellow Bay Area resident), I have never liked the term Judeo-Christian, for the reasons you have so clearly identified.
Ditto here in NJ.
Yes, I share your views, but I also have Orthodox Israeli cousins whose views are very different from yours and mine.
I learned, many years ago, that "Judeo-Christian" referred to the root of our laws, religion (one god) and culture, versus other civilizations.
When this term became common in the 1950s mainline Protestant denominations and Jews did indeed have a lot in common and still do.
Mina, I was raised by a Jewish mother, first generation from Eastern Europe, and a very lapsed Irish Catholic father. They were both true “Christians” in all the best senses of the word. I love both cultures and I am grateful I had so much richness in my life because of that. But I couldn’t agree more with you about the term “Jude’s-Christian values”. Always made my skin I crawl....
I wish you could see my smile of warmth and pleasure on reading this, Elisabeth! No wonder they gave you that beautiful name.
How wonderful that you had such amazing parents. I've been blessed to have friends who were born as Christians and live their Christianity every day. We share the same values and show great respect for each other's religion.
It's not the same at all. Messianic Jews are a weird in-between sect that believes Jesus was the prophet as described in the Old Testament, and therefore believe in Jesus as savior but lean more heavily on Old Testament/Torah teachings than other Christians. They consider themselves Jews, but actual Jews consider them Christians. Caveat: I'm very far from an expert, and needed to Wikipedia it to refresh myself. As folks above have pointed out, Judeo-Christian is a term with origin in American politics, intended to invoke an unified American society, originally to contrast with Communism. (Funny how the other Abrahamic religion - Islam - is conspicuously absent from this grouping.)
*Sigh* Essentially, religion is a human creation and just a mirror for all of human society. Good people do good with it, bad people do bad with it, and folks get caught up on weird details that don't actually matter. Yadda yadda yadda.
No, it's not the same - just look it up - you'll find plenty of simple explanations on line. Gayle, this is a private matter! Nobody can force a belief system on you. It's just "thanks but no thanks", end of story. Just enjoy being a truthful agnostic! I was an obedient little churchgoer until I was about 14 and they were starting to pressure me into making declarations and I realised that I couldn't. It just wasn't true. I didn't believe.
Hi Gayle -- Will and Anne-Louise have already given brief explanations, but the Wikipedia references will give you more information that I can squeeze into this response.
"The term Judeo-Christian is used to group Christianity and Judaism together" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judeo-Christian)
"Messianic Judaism is a modernist and syncretic movement of Protestant Christianity that incorporates some elements of Judaism and other Jewish traditions into evangelicalism." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messianic_Judaism)
A final difference. Messianic Judaism incorporates so many Christian beliefs that it is not at all Judaism. And like many Christian denominations (not all), Messianic Judaism proselytizes to get new converts, whereas Judaism does not.
“But the United States has traditionally backed democracies against autocracies. Today in Munich, Vice President Kamala Harris talked of the war crimes and atrocities the Russians have committed in Ukraine and said: ‘We have examined the evidence, we know the legal standards, and there is no doubt: These are crimes against humanity.’”
Yes, they are crimes against humanity, and Putin must be stopped!!!
The United States has NOT traditionally supported democracies over autocracies. Look at the incalculable damage it has done in Latin America by overthrowing legitimately elected governments which were perceived to be left-leaning or socialist.
The only relatively acknowledged US organized coup over a democratically elected, secular government in Iran degenerated into the oppressive theocracy we see today.
Ffs,
Different time, different era an I suspect a Republican at the helm.
It was an absolute monarchy btw. Remember the Shah?
The people rebelled and they won and were promised much.
Now they are rebelling again against the small minded misogynistic violent murderous comptrollers.
Answer me … a young woman should be beaten ,by men ,to death because her fashionista scarf wasn’t tied right …
Young men are hanged .. crime is supporting young woman’s protest… like being on the street.
Read and understand
The coup that brought the Shah into power, basically backed by big Oil interests in the US and CIA (Moussadeq who was overthrown wanted to nationalize the oil fields), was in 1953.
The Shah was overthrown in 1979--remember Carter lost, partly due to the hostage crisis in Tehran? The Shah was a brutal dictator, his regime tortured many people and initially, it was a nationalistic movement that finally managed to gather enough strength to lash back and get rid of him--which got taken over by the extreme Mullahs.
As we watch Carter in hospice now, never forget that Reagan sent envoys behind the scenes to slow down negotiations, promising $$ to these Mullahs, so Carter couldn't claim the 'win' of bringing home the hostages--the hostages were released the moment Reagan placed his hand on the bible to swear an oath to protect our Constitution. Outright treason that may have also tipped the balance against Democratic forces that were still nascent in Iran at the time, because Reagan and his Oil buddies continued to reward the Mullahs handsomely.
Anyone visiting Iran in the 70s would never have believed by 1980 the cosmopolitan, sophisticated (almost European) Iranian elite would be under the thumb of religious police. Their sophistication was unmatched at the time in the region.
A long and complicated history. Yes, CIA did a lot of damage by picking dictators through the 60s. But there were a lot of other currents and undertows involved in that disaster.
Talia You are correct that America’s ‘democratic principles’ abroad in recent generations have not reflected our self-proclaimed ‘exception is.’ We should and can do better. As I reflect on the Soviet Union, Putin’s Russia, Western colonialism, African fragmentation, and much more, I suggest that ‘he who is without sin cast the first stone.’
Not just recent generations but from the beginning of our history, the tension between supporting democratic principles and colonialism usually leaned towards colonialism. How we got Texas, the southwest (Mexican War), our treatment of the Philippines, Viet Nam, S. America, etc. What we couldn't buy, we just annexed.
Dot Like the British did before us—and the Roman Empire much earlier. I guess that Switzerland wasn’t ‘expansionist,’ though I’m not sure how the diverse cantons were assembled.
And the Greeks before Rome. I read a comment once about Christianity being a cult that killed off the old Greek and Roman religions. It gave me a whole new perspective on the Christian in Judaeo-Christian.
Dot Oh those crafty Athenians. They turned the Delian League into their own imperial club and shot daggers at the Spartans.
As for the Crusaders, their activities often were ‘non-Christian,’ while Saladin conducted himself with honor. Were the Crusaders fore-bearers of today’s Evangelical Christinas?
Like with everything else the US always supported what was in the interest of the US. That's every country's right - one should just always keep it in mind. Sometimes that interest just matches what the majority of the population of the other country wants.
That's not entirely true. The US government has always supported what was in the interest of the corporations that support the politicians who run the government. It was not in the US interest to interfere in the Middle East. For example, it was not in our long term interest to interfere with Iran in 1953, but British Petroleum took issue with democratically elected Mohammed Mossedegh nationalizing the oil business in Iran so they could build schools, hospitals, etc., so the CIA overthrew him, reinstalled the Shah, trained his secret police, SAVAK, and started the reign of terror that ended up with the Islamic revolution in 1979, which inspired us to back Saddam Hussein next door and you all know the rest. We are still dealing with the fallout from that. If we had supported democracy instead of a foreign oil business, the Middle East could have become a region of democracy instead of the mess it is now. Same with Central America. Why do we have so many people seeking asylum here? Because of our long term policy of destabilization in the region which has ended up with people fleeing failed states. All in the interest of private companies. Read Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein. It's a good description of our mid to later 20th century policies and how they have wreaked global havoc, all underpinned by conservative philosophies of people like Milton Friedman. The interests of the people of the US have rarely had anything to do with any of it.
The interests of the people of the US have had their champions including some influential public movements, but (though not for the first time) the power of money has increasingly "tr#mped" the public's interests in the last four decades. But yes, Iran came immediately to mind as a poster child for the evil wrought by conscienceless, extortionate greed. Reaganomics made the very rich waaay richer, many poorer and most more harried and less secure. That clear from the governments own stats. There are businesses that I admire and some I have genuinely mourned when they closed, but those that live by the "Chicago School" doctrine to "maximize profit" irrespective of the cost to others, have organized around sociopathy.
Totally agree with you and should have been more specific - the US does what is in the interest of corporate US and tells the ignorant masses, who have to foot the bill, be it by providing soldiers or financing the military, that it is in their own interest.
🎯💯
Yes! We reap what we sow…
The Shock Doctrine was compelling, and it remains one of the most frightening narratives of how we got to present day economics and political violence.
So much truth in so Nanyang comments in this thread! But do let us keep in mind that the US still has to give lip service to support for democracies because enough of us want to believe in our ideals. Corporations use propaganda to cover their real purposes and their money to buy politicians, so it is up to us to change this. Not easy! And a very long way to go.
But let's follow the vision of true liberty and justice for all. Not just here, but all over the planet. That would include everything from gender and racial justice to averting disastrous climate change. Enough of a challenge? It'll do!
Exactly!
And Iran in the 1950s, installing the Shah in a coup against a democratically elected president. Look where that got us!
Marg You are correct that CIA (Ike & the Dulles boys) sought, in concert with the Brits, to oust Mossadeq and support the Shah (who had fled to Rome). In fact, the CIA coup failed and an Iranian general pulled off the toppling of Mossadaq.
The Shah, the ‘Peacock Emperor,’ became increasingly imperial as he became flush with oil revenues in the 1970s. [I had created international bond ratings for Moody’s Investors Service]. When Merrill Lynch brought a $1 billion Iranian bond issue to me in 1975, I immediately told them that, were they to pursue this long-term bond issue I would rate it below investment grade. It was clear to me that the Shah’s Iran was on a slippery slope.]
After the Shah was forced to flee Iran, he finally ended up in Mexico dying of cancer. Henry Kissinger, Nelson Rockefeller, and others lobbied to bring ‘our friend’ the Shah to NYC for medical treatment. This sparked the assault against our Teheran embassy and the 55 embassy hostages.
Thank you, Keith, for this history lesson. I was a senior in college when the embassy hostage crisis took place. The decades earlier events that lead to didn’t seem to be made available for general news consumption, and to my 22 year old ears, it all was blamed on radical Islamic students and student mullahs. As we are reminded now on a nearly daily basis, the truth hurts.
* that should be strident mullahs.
Iran, where a democratically elected government was brought down by the CIA, all the dictators in Vietnam after the US got involved, Nicaragua with the dirty deeds of the Reagan supporters. Etc. Thank you, Talia for reminding us to see reality, as Heather has described it.
And yet, as we decry the Russian crimes against humanity, and there are many, and as we are horrified by their separation of Ukrainian families and by their forcibly placing Ukrainian children with Russian families, what are we doing to unite the 1,000+ children we separated at southern border from their families? Until we have reunited all of the children and parents we tore apart, let us look in the mirror and be mindful of the example that we have set.
We have been working on it. As an immigration attorney, I can tell you that the differences between the Trump and Biden administrations are profound and in a good way. The Biden administration isn't perfect but they inherited an insane mess based on the rule of man and not the rule of law. In the last couple of years, I have won cases in immigration court that were complete losers under Trump.
What did Biden inherit that wasn’t a mess.
Thank you Ellen. One of the many messes was tfg use of Title 42 to effectively deport genuine asylum seekers to a sometimes hellish limbo purportedly because of Covid 19. That travesty was set for a SCOTUS oral argument in March. But, Biden's US Solicitor General informed SCOTUS of the impending cessation of COVID 19 regulation in May 2023. In a terse Order, SCOTUS took the Title 42 case OFF calendar. But, the Biden Team's brief to SCOTUS makes good reading.
The Library of Congress? I think the miscreants left that pretty well alone. They do not read that often.
And if he'd only just messed with the National Archives....
Agreed. But I wasn't comparing Biden and Trump. I was questioning our smugness about the Russians crimes when we ourselves, as a country, have been guilty of some of the same and have only partially managed to rectify our crimes.
And so, we justify our poor behavior in war as Collateral Damage, as if that makes rampant loss of life is a good thing. It seems to be just fine for the Lords of War who always profit from war and then again in the aftermath for the reconstruction of the society they so ardently crushed.
You lot cage your unaccompanied minors. Sort of hoping no more. Russians take them an inculcate them. Twenty years forth, the war will still rage.
Keep up the good work. And thank you.
Thank you for providing a dose of policy review.
I don't remember the recent stats but the Biden admin has made real progress on reunification and remains committed to it. We need to make sure that it is legally impossible to repeat.
The ACLU challenged the 4000+ tfg family separstions in Court & is currently negotiating a settlment with the US through the Dept of Homeland Security that may provide victims an expedited process to obtain lawful status so that broken-up families do not have to through the lenthy immigration battle that one separated father of 6 Central American asylum seekers suffered ending in a rare successful asylum claim & the re-uniting one Family in the US: the mother, father. 3 daughters & 1 son are back together. ACLU contact: LEE GELERNT.
And, there is the crime against our own residents that we refuse to do anything about. https://www.kff.org/global-health-policy/issue-brief/child-and-teen-firearm-mortality-in-the-u-s-and-peer-countries/
Yes while Dems are better on this, they have not done enough. Agree
Betsy, the Russians have kidnapped thousands of Ukrainian children and are busy brainwashing them. If that is not a crime against humanity, I don’t know what is.
ALI VELSHI was back in the Ukraine Capital yesterday with a 7 person international Crew willing & able to investigate & report any issue arising out of Putin's human atrocities. I expect another two (2) episodes Sunday morning and a wider audience next week in VELSHI's new msnbc starting Time. 🇺🇦
Look forward to it.
Rape from Russians to Ukrainians aged 4 to 85 ..
not targeting civilians, count the apartment towers hit.
So much hypocrisy!
Stopped and be held accountable. He has joined the ranks of Pinochet, Mussolini, Stalin, on his way to Hitler status.
Well past that Ted. The meat in the meat grinder are troops from ethnic areas. Possibly rebellious, but not without men.
Do you really think this proxy war will stop Putin, we learn nothing from one failed war after another. Putin is horrible but that does not make it right that we poked him into this war.
Fun fact: Supporting an invaded ally does not a "proxy war" make! The more you know!
Prompts for extra credit: Did we also "poke" the dictator in question into committing mass atrocities after invading a peaceful neighbor unprovoked? Would the more correct response be to abandon our ally by doing nothing? Is there any limit to how outrageously evil someone can be before it is a good idea to intervene? And can a war be declared as "failed" when your assistance is actually allowing it to be won?
Please type your essay in 12-point Times New Roman and have it on my desk no later than Friday.
Will Could you grant me an extension on your assignment? And would you permit me 16-point type, since my eyes are a bit dim?
Keith, the assignment is extra credit, so it actually won't be necessary for you to complete if you are already passing the class. And since the class is "Having The Most Basic Idea Of What Is Going On 101," you probably already are!
If you are an overachiever, I grant your requests! The School of the Commentariat officially requires an eyeglass prescription for font disability accomodations, but as long as you don't tell the dean it will be fine.
🤣🤣👏👏
Ohhh...you two are too funny!!
😁😅😂
This is really condescending and incorrect. We did provoke him. And when there was desire and movement between Zelensky and Putin to negotiate a peaceful settlement less than 2 weeks into this war, that effort was shut down. By US!!!! WE wanted that war.
It's absolutely a proxy war. A very dangerous one. Other world leaders are begging us to support peace negotiations. For whatever self-serving reasons, Rs want peace. At this point, that makes a lot more sense than what we're doing right now. Sad and true.
Suz-an, I don't mind anyone calling me condescending; I have long had an "attitude problem," and kept it meticulously maintained. But if you are going to call me incorrect, you are going to need to bring the receipts, and all I'm seeing here are blank scraps. I am a frequent critic of our military and foreign policy, but the evidence against your claim of U.S. provocation is overwhelming. If Russia left tomorrow, this would be over immediately.
Putin has long espoused irredentist views, and for decades has attempted to weaken NATO, even contrary to many agreements signed by Russia. The 2014 Revolution was mostly a response to his efforts to form a puppet government. His annexation of Crimea was provocative, and appeased by the west. He built up troops over a year before the invasion and blatantly lied about his intentions, while the US/NATO did not transfer capabilities to Ukraine until only a few months prior. The invasion itself was launched directly after Putin began propagandizing blatant lies about "de-Nazification" and signed more illegal annexation orders. The peace talks you referred to were distrusted by most international observers, since Russia has a history of phony negotiating tactics, the U.S. did not play any notable intermediary role, they primarily focused on humanitarian corridors. They were also doomed from the outset, as Ukraine insisted on maintaining it's territorial integrity, while Russia would not negotiate over invaded territory and demanded Ukraine hand over its ability to decide its own treaties in the future, polar opposite non-negotiables. The invasion was condemned by all major international bodies, worldwide sanctions were undertaken (at political and economic cost to the US and EU), and aid was provided independently from dozens of countries on every continent. The EU provided military aid for the first time ever. At every opportunity the US and lead providers of aid gave less than requested initially by Ukraine, and never declared a no-fly zone.
Where in here do signs point to "US-driven proxy war a la Vietnam?"
I admit to little knowledge on the subject but I see Putin's influence on tRump for 4 years and tfg's shenanigans in Ukraine as evidence of Putin's softening up Ukraine for take-over. Alas, Putin had to invade when tfg lost reelection.
Actually Putin invaded Crimea, was is Ukraine, during Trump's presidency and was appeased.
Hi Will! Not calling YOU condescending... tho if the shoe fits... whatever. Mostly, I find you quite informed and informative. Enlightening, even. Your writing is whip smart, bright, and engaging. I always read it. Thanks for bringing it here!
The tone of your words in that post only... felt condescending and surprisingly uninformed (for a change) to my sensitivities. Others might not agree.
Like Nora, I have also been listening, reading, watching many people (independent, not corporate sources) way smarter than me. And calling on my own background and zillions of decades :-) of study and close observation. So i'm putting this puzzle together differently than you. My current conclusions say that we have a central and destructive part in this conflict, as much as we might want to place ALL 'blame' elsewhere. Just as we decided the war should proceed, we can also decide to stop it and get everyone to the peace table. Not as easy now as it was a year ago. Still, Ukraine is nowhere without us.
These issues are complex. They're always basically human relationships. Goodness knows, human relations have always been fraught. International relationships are even more difficult and are on a grander scale, often affecting many populations. This particular situation is needlessly foolish and dangerous to the entire world. Putin is not Hitler.
We, Americans, have a very long history of bullying the rest of the world with little knowledge or regard for subtle and not-so-subtle matters that we might not even be aware of, that are nevertheless highly offensive or threatening or otherwise unsettling to others with less power. Because we can. And that is never helpful for genuine cooperation and peace. We can't ever underestimate or dismiss these things.
We have the power and don't need to concern ourselves with how our policies or actions or proclamations, etc. affect others. So we often don't. Whether we're simply arrogant or ignorant or whatever doesn't matter in the end. We rule... or at least we have so far during the past hundred years or so.
President Obama wisely said that Ukraine was not in our sphere of influence. Not worth starting WWIII over. And he stayed OUT. Has anyone asked WHY are we really sooo involved in this conflict?? I've heard plenty of platitudes and BS excuses.
No one has legitimately explained WHY we are sooo willing to send our money and arms to this conflict. The logical reasons seem to rest in the profiteering of our MIC and now perhaps Wall Street licking their chops over how they're gonna 'rebuild' Ukraine. If you have other valid info, then let's have it!
Russia has an economy that's the size of Italy's. They are NOT gonna take over Europe. Even Macron realizes that. If Putin (or anyone) set up arms on our southern or northern border... or hey, in Cuba! ... we would NOT just shrug and ignore it.
While we don't like Putin, he is a creature of his country's brutal history. In some ways, his patience thus far has amazed me, considering he might be the crazy person we all believe him to be. I'm beginning to doubt he's as out to lunch as we all think. He's not stupid. Luckily, he's also not the narcissistic, impulsive idiot cheeto is, either. However, his macho back is against the wall.
Recently, President Lula of Brazil visited to bring his urgent message of PEACE. Not sure we got his message clearly. Our MSM certainly didn't. He's not the only one who seriously wants to help stop this nonsense and get us back on track for a peaceful world. We all have much bigger issues and more important issues to focus on if we're to survive, never mind thrive in the future.
You can research this info yourself and decide what you think. I only ask that you consider that there might be more than you or I or any one of us knows to this situation before we decide we know for sure what's what. Too much at stake. We have some serious troubles to resolve for ALL of us. Going off with only partial and/or incorrect info because those who stand to benefit from our not questioning them and their motives (MSM, etc) doesn't serve any of us. We can and need to do better than that.
The whole world is in flux right now. Realignment of everything, everywhere is what's happening. We're all living thru it... and it's bizarro for sure. Question everything. We're all doing the best we can with what we have.
Deep bow to you, Will. Your generation and your children's futures depend on this.
Sorry for the late reply, Suz-an. Your response was so sincere, thorough, and well elucidated, I figured you deserved something in kind.
I will forgo dredging up any further laundry listing of facts surrounding this issue, under the assumption that we are both intelligent people with high quality sources of a variety of sources (MSM & non-MSM). I will simply try to answer your question of "WHY are sooo involved [&] sooo willing to send our money and arms to this conflict?" I cannot answer this question for "we," the general citizenry, but I can and will answer for "I," the single citizen. A citizen who is a proud Win Without War member. A citizen who constantly calls his Senators every year in vain to ask to slash the Pentagon budget. A citizen who thinks this is the only post-WW2 conflict of which I approve of and demand our participation in (barring the very, very initial 9/11 response).
As a US citizen, my stance on Ukraine assistance is derived from what I see as an ironclad moral stance, rather than an arcane geopolitical one. It is pretty clear-cut to me: in the 21st century, the territorial integrity of a peaceful nation is sacred, non-negotiable, and paramount. Period. Furthermore, each nation should be free to enter its own alliances and conduct its own affairs without intimidation or interference. Period. I think that if any country is having these precepts violated, and are even tangentially allied to us, we should provide as much assistance as possible, and failure to do so would be an absolute betrayal of our stated value of self-determination. (Ironically, this is why I don't support so many other US foreign actions: I find we use our might to selectively interfere rather than defend against interference.) And ideally we should not go it alone in a show of unilateral power, we should be leaders in an international coalition forcefully rejecting any attempt to violate this integrity. I am very glad to see the Biden administration finally taking this approach with Ukraine.
And I staunchly believe these things consistently, regardless of how big or small the countries involved are, or the level of our perceived national interests prior. China invades Indonesia? We should help. North Macedonia invades Lichtenstein? We should help. And so on. Every other possible situation that is not an ally being attacked on their internationally-recognized land (Ukraine), or us being attacked directly (9/11), we should solve using diplomacy alone, or stay out entirely.
It is interesting you bring up the Obama administration stance in this arena, because it is perhaps the only time I, as a citizen, felt Obama got something completely and totally wrong. We should indeed have led a response to the Crimea "annexation," and Ukraine should have been given NATO (and EU) status 15 years ago when they first requested it. His lack of foresight in prioritizing this on the international stage led us to where we are now.
I am simply rejecting on both ethical and purely logical grounds the idea NATO "coming to Russia's doorstep" serves as a reasonable provocation for Russia to defend itself preemptively. Jumping off your example, if Mexico began amassing a larger military while attempting to enter into a pact with China, I certainly would be enormously concerned. I would not, however, support a lightning strike on Mexico City a viable response, for Pete's sake. Each country gets to conduct its own alliances and affairs, and maintain its own borders. Period.
Lastly, I see no convincing sign that US pressure would get peace talks successfully started, nor am I seeing the sign that other leaders are fervently hoping we do so. Ukrainian leadership and Russian leadership have both banned talks unless mutually exclusive terms are met, terms which are essential to the conflict rather than secondary. Plus, I don't see how any pressure we would bring would not count as simply another form of interference in matters.
I hope this makes sense! Thank you for the engagement on this. Even if we don't agree, how refreshing IS this forum that it makes room for such discourse, in addition to the typical snappy responses? Very refreshing indeed.
Don't you remember that Putin against any rules of international law occupied the Krim, after he had - again against all rules of international law - had started wars agains Georgia and Tschechnia, carpet-bombing Syria? I think you're falling for the Russian propaganda with Putin's constant complaining how unfairly Russia is treated, however, I can't remember at any stage in the last 30-40 years that any Western politician, leave alone NATO leader, would have said "lets go attack Russia!" Appeasement didn't work when Chamberlain did it, it won't work with Putin either.
Pray tell, how did we “provoke” him? Sounds like the Putin assertion , which is nonsense, “you’re putting NATO on our border”. The only peace deal put forward was to cede Donbas.
Here’s Putin “ negotiating”
“If you Agree to our demands we will stop bombing you. Do as I say and all will be fine. Thank you for capitulating; are we done now? Good!”
Another proxy Russian commentator.
Vietnam was effectively a proxy war too. And that one certainly came to a sad conclusion, and at a huge price. Gotta wonder. I welcome any contrast anyone would like to make.
Vietnam was part of the domino theory. Communist China would take Vietnam and one by one the south East Asian countries would fall.
Hells bells.
The Americans went there as advisors to the French colonialists.
The Australians went there as help for the Americans. All the way with Lbj.
The French took off … they are always there when they need you.
So the north Vietnamese attacked and won. It was their country after all. What would you do to protect your?
Stupid thing is that the north Vietnamese despise and hate the Chinese.
Another stupid thing is that formally Saigon now called Ho Chi Minh City is a major tourist destination of Australians and Americans.
I’m going to make this short and sweet: Putin has said time & time again that he means to “restore” the USSR. He needs to be contained now before he goes for Poland or the Baltics, which would lead us straight into WW3. This is not a theory but reality. Also, as noted, appeasement never works with tyrants.
William 550,000 American soldiers in Vietnam I don’t consider a ‘proxy war.’ Also tens of thousands of dead Americans and far more wounded, often with PTSD. Ukraine is a proxy war,’ since we have virtually no American boots on the ground.
Ex military myself and appreciate your clarification Keith. I was using proxy in the sense that the the South Vietnamese were fighting their war for us, in analogous way to the Ukrainians fighting their war for us. And the total dead in Ukraine is working its way up to our American death count (in Vietnam) which is nowhere near the total death count of the Vietnam War. I have nothing but sympathy and respect for those of my peers who gave their lives for a mistake.
When was he poked into this war? Is the imagined security threat of Putin more important than the true security threat that other countries had to experience - Georgia, Tschechnia etc and now Ukraine? Europe was for now decades appeasing Putin - what's the result?
I don't think you quite understand Putin's thinking - Putin wants to resurrect an empire the size of the former Sowjet Union, there is no doubt. Now, you can say "where is this the US's problem if he takes over at least half of Europe?" but I think it would become a very difficult world to live in for the US, leave alone of course that one thing is conquering countries but another thing to keep them. This whole one-man show will still cost a lot of Russian and other lifes is my uneducated guess.
Nora, no one poked him into the war. He wants to be Putin the great. Memorable, as he shall be … like hitler … admired like Peter the Great … Nup. Peter wanted closer ties with Europe.
Oh yes we did along with NATO. We destabilized Ukraine by sticking our nose into it in 2014 and then poked the bear with the expansion of NATO. If you don’t believe it you are only reading MSM and the party line. We are the country of failed never ending war and it is our foreign policy that continues this. My resources are, Chris Hedges, Democracy Now, Jeffery Sachs, Matt Taibbi, Aron Mate, Code Pink among others.
Got it. The Putin line. Please explain “ the expansion of NATO” as an excuse for invasion.
I recommend Timothy Snyder’s “Thinking About...” Substack posts to you. His depth of understanding of the Ukraine situation and also how fascism and tyranny operate has been very useful to me in gaining perspective after hearing the views of Chris Hedges.
Dan Tim Snyder and Anne Applebaum are spot on! I subscribe to Tim’s Substack and consider his book Bloodlands superb.
His online Ukraine course is fascinating.
Nora - for example, I highly recommend Dr. Snyder’s summary of what’s wrong with Putin’s justification for his ambitions in Ukraine, more specifically Crimea:
https://open.substack.com/pub/snyder/p/russias-crimea-disconnect?r=8fpwo&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
I do not ask this question in anger, nor is it rhetorical: in all sincerity, can you explain how "we poked him into this war" because I honestly don't know how you came to that conclusion.
Smarter people than me informed me, Pulitzer Prize winning journalists have said this and I listed my sources already so I will not waste my time or yours if you can’t look beyond the propaganda pushed by the Biden administration or read sources other than the MSM I am not going to convince you. Our interference into Ukraine has been going on since the late 1990s.
Sorry, Matt Taibi and his oh so self serving/self enriching “Twitter Files”immediately disqualifies your sources, and your opinions seem rather propagandist.
I have many other sources and Matt Taibbi is a smart guy, as are my other sources. Who are you to disqualify anyone that seems rather self serving.
Watching the “hearing” soundly “pi**”in his Cheerios. Then there’s this: https://www.thebulwark.com/no-you-do-not-have-a-constitutional-right-to-post-hunter-bidens-dick-pic-on-twitter/
agree, Nora
Poked?
Let’s not forget that before he went into politics, Rick Scott took over HCA, changed its name & ran it into the ground while personally benefiting financially. His behavior & goals haven’t changed.
Let us prey.
Wonderful comment . . . I needed a good chuckle during this discussion and this one tickled my fancy.
Don’t you love it when that happens? I sure do.
Let's also not forget that the "reasonable" Republican, Mitt Romney, also engaged in vulture capitalism.
At deposition exercised his 5th Amendment right to remain silent 75 times. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2014/jun/17/florida-democratic-party/rick-scott-took-5th-75-times-democratic-party-ad-s/
100 Didn’t Trump proclaim that anyone exercising his/her Fifth Amendment right was admitting guilt, BEFORE starting to sing Fifth Amendment like a canary?
I just posted the same, before I saw your post. BTW, I don't know if Cohen said where he got those words from. They are a direct quote from Wikipedia. I acknowledge that in my post.
Thanks for reiterating this criminal act by the hypocrite senator
Thank you once again for a wonderful summary of the last few days.
Barry Goldwater warned about Christian nationalism taking over the Republican Party and he was right:
"Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the (Republican) party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me.
Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them."
But don't forget, in 1964, Goldwater was the first Republican to win the South by getting bigotted Democrats to switch parties.
The GQP is made up of two extremist groups and they both believe in a social hierarchy of inequality and the use of severe punishment to enforce their hierarchy of white, Chistrianist, supremacy.
Andy, exactly. As odious as Goldwater was, even he was afraid of the evangelical Christians.
Andy Though LBJ won a sweeping re-election in 1964, the fight over civil rights provided Goldwater a white racist advantage in the South.
Those last two sentences sure sound like he's referring to the Taliban!
The preachers and their counterparts in all countries use their cruel God and unholy religion for their takeover. They can sucker a whole bunch of people that way. Take power, control, dominate.
Exactly why reasoning with them from our values, visions, ideals goes nowhere.
...I meant they aren’t all that free to leave the ideology that cements their lives.
Maybe... if they're even aware on a conscious level that this is what's happening. If they are making any kind of conscious choice. Often, my guess is they don't. As a mentor of mine always says, "The goldfish doesn't know it's in the water."
What about the closeted gay or trans ones? Or the kids who have long since lost respect for their parents and their parents ways of thinking? Or the ones who are finding it difficult to reconcile the people they are drawn to with their more liberal ways of thinking. Just a crack is how the light gets in. Paraphrasing Leonard Cohen. And by the way. It was Cohen who wrote and sang the lyrics “...and they’ll be a meter on your bed” which I didn’t understand at the time that album came out. Now I do.
Well, they're not unconscious about their options and choices. Yeah.
I lean toward the hopeful side. And I’m listening to your thoughts with pricked ears and know you are right. My belief is that more people than not, many more, can tell when a person is speaking from the truth and from the heart compared to the hyped up speakers we see who are angry, robotic and glazed over. Don jr’s videos are an example of this but there are many out there. We’ve got this.
Exactly. It’s because the congregation, their peer groups, and their friends and relatives anchor the whole thing down. Nobody is free to leave without giving up everyone they know and their town as well.
Mary How delightful to quote Barry Goldwater against those unChristian Evangelicals.
Facts About the Solvency of Social Security
'Social Security pays benefits out of its retirement and disability trust funds. Think of these as checking accounts, with funds flowing in primarily from the Federal Insurance Contributions Act, or FICA, which levies a 12.4 percent tax on wages that is split by employers and workers. The combined trust fund accounts are projected to be depleted in 2035.'
'Lower birthrates mean that fewer workers are paying into the system today than the growing number of people retiring and collecting benefits. Another cause of the shortfall is rising income inequality. Social Security collects FICA contributions only up to a certain wage ($160,200 this year), leaving a growing share of wages outside the taxable base.'
'Unless Congress acts by 2035, Social Security funds will be sufficient to pay only about 80 percent of the program’s obligations to retirees and disabled workers. The resulting benefit cut — estimated at 20 to 25 percent over time — would affect current and future beneficiaries alike, pushing up poverty rates among retirees by 60 percent, according to projections by the Urban Institute.'
'The cuts would be especially painful for today’s younger workers and people of color, according to the institute’s projections. If the financing gap is left unaddressed, 49 percent of workers born from 1980 to 1989, or early millennials, would lack the income they need to meet basic living expenses — a rate that jumps to 53 percent for Black adults in that age group, and 62 percent for Hispanic adults.'
“People of color depend disproportionately on Social Security, so if benefits are cut it’s going to be especially devastating for them,” said Richard Johnson, senior fellow and director of the Urban Institute’s Program on Retirement Policy.'
'Aside from the 2035 problem, Social Security is already on track to replace less pre-retirement income for today’s younger workers than for today’s retirees. That is attributable, mainly, to the last major changes to the program, which were enacted in 1983. That legislation put in motion a gradual increase in the Full Retirement Age, or F.R.A. — the age when you qualify to receive 100 percent of your benefit. Before 1983, the F.R.A. was 65, but for everyone born in 1960 and later, it is 67. Every year increase in the F.R.A. equates roughly to a 6.5 percent cut in benefits.'
'Just this week, Senators Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts introduced the latest version of their own Social Security proposal. It would extend solvency by 75 years, give nearly all beneficiaries an increase of $200 per month through a revision in the benefit formula and adopt a more generous annual cost-of-living increase. It would be funded by applying current FICA tax rates to incomes above $250,000, and with two new taxes on investment income.' (NYTimes)
Great clear, explanatory comment, Fern.
The Sanders/Warren proposal would be a huge step in the right direction. Another step would be to make the FICA tax progressive and apply it to investment income as well. It's called redistributing the wealth. This GOP will never vote for it, of course.
Thanks for these details on SS. I would also point out that it is a from of Basic Minimum Income for retired people.
https://college.unc.edu/2021/03/universal-basic-income/
I do not understand your reply, AndyWAWG. Universal Basic Income is not a form of SS. I do not know if it is intended as a replacement for SS by the right-wing of the Republican Party. Clearly, it warrants examination. From what I read it is a token of relief.
Hi Fern, Sorry for the confusion.
I’m trying to point out that BMI can come in many forms funded in many ways and that SS is one of these possible forms of income. I’m trying to show SS as one example of BMI to help see the benefit of BMI. See details below on average incomes and average SS payments for those 65 or older:
"Consider the Average Social Security Payment
"The average Social Security benefit is expected to be $1,827 per month in January 2023. The maximum possible Social Security benefit for someone who retires at full retirement age is $3,627 in 2023. However, a worker would need to earn the maximum taxable amount, currently $160,200 for 2023, over a 35-year career to get this Social Security payment."
https://money.usnews.com/money/retirement/social-security/articles/how-much-you-will-get-from-social-security
Now consider our average monthly working income:
"Key findings
* The average income for U.S. adults 65 and older is $75,254.
* The median income for U.S. adults 65 and older is $47,620.
* Average annual expenses for adults 65 and older are $48,872. [$4,073/month]
* The average monthly Social Security benefit for retired workers is $1,681 and is set to rise to $1,827 in 2023."
"When we break this down on a monthly basis, the average income for U.S. adults aged 65 and older is $6,271. The median monthly income for that age group is $3,968."
https://www.fool.com/research/average-retirement-income/
As shown above SS income does not account for all income of those 65 or older. The average monthly SS income is only 46% of the MEDIAN income of adults 65 or older and 29% of AVERAGE income based on reports referenced above. Average SS covers only 45% of average expenses.
Thanks, Andy. I did take some time to identify the basis for Universal Basic Income, including the countries that have considered and or implemented it in some way from Brazil to the UK. I even chased down Bernie Sanders' comments on UBI. I think we in the US are in a mess of various types of supplementary support -- SNAP, SSNAP, WIC, Medicaid, SAMHSA,, SSI, SSA, Student Debt., USCitizenServies, LIHEAP, etc., Who has a plan to coordinate our insufficient and poorly administered support of Americans in need of it?
I think Andy means what I am thinking, that SS was meant to be a supplement, not a full, comfortable retirement.
I do not know what AndyWAWG has in mind. Unless you have conferred with him, I suggest an understanding of the country's history of Social Security:
'The Social Security Act was signed into law by President Roosevelt on August 14, 1935. In addition to several provisions for general welfare, the new Act created a social insurance program designed to pay retired workers age 65 or older a continuing income after retirement. (Full Text of President Roosevelt's Statement At Bill Signing Ceremony.)'
"We can never insure one hundred percent of the population against one hundred percent of the hazards and vicissitudes of life, but we have tried to frame a law which will give some measure of protection to the average citizen and to his family against the loss of a job and against poverty-ridden old age."--
President Roosevelt upon signing Social Security Act'
Historical Background And Development Of Social Security is found SSA.gov
An official website of the Social Security Administration. Produced and published at taxpayer expense.
https://www.ssa.gov/history/50ed.html#:~:text=The%20Social%20Security%20Act%20established,age%20benefits%20for%20retired%20workers.
The following was taken from our history of Social Security,
'Civil War Pensions: America's First "Social Security" Program'
'Although Social Security did not really arrive in America until 1935, there was one important precursor, that offered something we could recognize as a social security program, to one special segment of the American population. Following the Civil War, there were hundreds of thousands of widows and orphans, and hundreds of thousands of disabled veterans. In fact, immediately following the Civil War a much higher proportion of the population was disabled or survivors of deceased breadwinners than at any time in America's history. This led to the development of a generous pension program, with interesting similarities to later developments in Social Security. (The first national pension program for soldiers was actually passed in early 1776, prior even to the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Throughout America's ante-bellum period pensions of limited types were paid to veterans of America's various wars. But it was with the creation of Civil War pensions that a full-fledged pension system developed in America for the first time.)'
'As America slipped into economic depression following the Crash of 1929, unemployment exceeded 25%; about 10,000 banks failed; the Gross National Product declined from $105 billion in 1929 to only $55 billion in 1932. Compared to pre-Depression levels, net new business investment was a minus $5.8 billion in 1932. Wages paid to workers declined from $50 billion in 1929 to only $30 billion in 1932.'
'The Social Security program that would eventually be adopted in late 1935 relied for its core principles on the concept of "social insurance." Social insurance was a respectable and serious intellectual tradition that began in Europe in the 19th century and was an expression of a European social welfare tradition. It was first adopted in Germany in 1889 at the urging of the famous Chancellor, Otto von Bismarck. Indeed, by the time America adopted social insurance in 1935, there were 34 nations already operating some form of social insurance program(about 20 of these were contributory programs like Social Security). Philosophically, social insurance emphasized government-sponsored efforts to provide for the economic security of its citizens. The tradition of social insurance would come to be seen as the reasonable, practical alternative to the radical calls to action represented by Townsend, Long, Sinclair and the others.'
'Although the definition of social insurance can vary considerably in its particulars, its basic features are: the insurance principle under which a group of persons are "insured" in some way against a defined risk, and a social element which usually means that the program is shaped in part by broader social objectives, rather than being shaped solely by the self-interest of the individual participants. Social insurance coverage can be provided for a number of different types of insured conditions, from disability and death to old-age or unemployment. We may find it obvious to think of death, disability or unemployment as conditions causing loss of income and which can be ameliorated by pooling of risk. It is at first a little odd to think of old-age or retirement in these same terms. But that is precisely how the early social insurance theorists conceived of retirement, as producing a loss of income due to cessation of work activity.'
***
I'm 74 and I was always told SS was meant to keep the old from starving to death. Take one look at how we treat our elderly today,anyone living on SS alone, in elderly housing, has a subsistence income. Retirees with a comfortable circumstance have additional income. I did not confer with anyone but I know what he meant about "Basic Minimum Income for retired people."
Bernie Sanders has been asked about BMI and the following link covers his responses.
https://medium.com/basic-income/on-the-record-bernie-sanders-on-basic-income-de9162fb3b5c
Thank you for your response, dotsieradzki. I was responding to your interpretation of what AndyWAWG may have meant. I agree, that many groups of Americans, families, elderly, youth and disabled are not supported in the way that some politicians, media 'stars' and spokespeople representing their own self-interest and ideologies threatening democracy misrepresent our current socio-economic issues.
The following are not encouraging.
'Social Security services to worsen despite budget boost, agency head says'
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/02/18/social-security-services-degrade-congress/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/12/05/social-security-disability-benefit-offices-backlog-breaking-point/
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/how-dehumanizing-administrative-burdens-harm-disabled-people/
A fine and explicit definition. If only we could put a quick definition out there... maybe “ in Social Security we trust” on license plates!
FERN Fine summation, but the chances of the Sanders/Warren proposal clearing Congress is akin to my winning the 100 meter dash at the Olympics with my walker. Not impossible, but rather unlikely.
Keith, we have to keep asking McCarthy and his tribe to support this proposal, spelling it out, over and over again, so that the American people hear it. Sanders' and Warren's proposal is for the people and we want it. When it passes, we will carry you and all the people it will help across the finish line.
FERn When such a magical moment occurs, I shall push my walker over the finish line while my horn plays Battle Hymn of the Republic.
I'll be there, Keith. Cannot wait to hear you on your horn -- I bet it is loud!
Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t the SS Trust Fund raided by congress more than once and never repaid?
Research Note #4:
Inter-Fund Borrowing Among the Trust Funds
In the early 1980s the Social Security Trust Funds had developed short-term cash flow problems, as a result of the adverse performance of the economy during the "stagflation" of the 1970s. As a stop-gap measure, Congress passed legislation in 1981 to permit inter-fund borrowing among the three Trust Funds (the Old-Age and Survivors Trust Fund; the Disability Trust Fund; and the Medicare Trust Fund). This authority was to lapse at the end of 1982. However, the 1983 Amendments extended the inter-fund borrowing authority to the end of 1987. Under the law as amended, all loans would have to be repaid by the end of 1989.
The inter-fund loans were required to be repaid with an amount of interest equal to that which the loaning fund would have earned had it had use of the money during this time. In other words, the borrowing fund was required to make the loaning fund whole at the end of the process.
This authority was used twice, once in November 1982 and once in December 1982. The total amount borrowed was $17.5 billion. The Old-Age and Survivors Trust Fund borrowed the money-$5.1 billion from the Disability Trust Fund and $12.4 billion from the Medicare Trust Fund. Repayment began in 1985 and the debt to the Medicare Trust Fund was paid off by January 1986 and the debt to the Disability Trust Fund was liquidated in April 1986. (SS Agency, History. This is an archival or historical document and may not reflect current policies or procedures)
For further interest on your part, you may check the following:
https://www.aarp.org/retirement/social-security/info-2020/10-myths-explained.html
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/does-congress-raid-social-security/
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/25/social-security-isnt-bankrupt-what-we-know-about-future-benefits.html
WOW: As always, thank you for your Post. The links you provided were especially useful in clearing up the many misconceptions we encounter in daily conversations.
Thank you, Rebekha. I am glad to be helpful.
Wow! Thank you.
Fern:
Keep in mind Social Security was always funded by workers, workers who were not making six-digit yearly incomes and whose income was measured in hourly wages. It is the worker's benefit which makes it a liability for politicians to eliminate it or dimmish it. SS belongs to us and not to the millionaires.
About a decade ago two people I write with proposed a plan to secure SS funding beyond what it is today or what it was 10 years ago. It increased withholding one tenth of 1% each year for individuals and companies. Over a decade, it would equate to an increase of 1% for people and for companies. Yearly increases in US productivity surpasses this. It would not be burdensome to either business or labor.
Social Security belongs to workers or Labor and not millionaires. The idea is to keep it as such and not tax the upper income levels. As it i, if your income surpasses a certain point while on SS, you will pay more tax. If you use Medicare, you will also pay more above a certain income after retirement.
The plan was called the Northwest Plan as written by Dale Coberly and Bruce Webb. to Congressman DeFazio who in turn sent it to the Social Security administration. Karen P. Glenn
Deputy Chief Actuary, Office of the Chief Actuary, Social Security Administration responded back to both Dale and Bruce and in turn copied Rina Wulfing from Rep. DeFazio’s office and Defazio on this email. Part of the text:
"Your proposal would increase the payroll tax rate gradually, by 0.2 percentage point per year beginning in 2018 (a 0.1-percent increase for employees and employers, each). Based on the tables you provided, it appears you would propose an “automatic adjustment” to the rate in the future, allowing the tax rate increases to stop and then resume, applying a 0.2 percentage point increase whenever the 10th year subsequent would otherwise have a trust fund ratio (TFR) less than 100 percent of annual cost. The intent appears to be that TFR would not fall below 100 percent. If we are understanding your proposal correctly, this type of adjustment would very likely maintain trust fund solvency for the foreseeable future, based on the Trustees’ intermediate assumptions."
In other words, it would work using a minimalist action.
If you are a reader of Prof. Dean Baker, he has a commentary on US Productivity. "Declining population and diminished national power is bad news?"
Census Bureau "Statistical Replacement Rate in 2020 fell to 1,637.5 births per 1,000 women, down from 1.7 births per 1,000 women in 2019, and also down from 2,01 in 2006. "300 Million and Counting," Joel Garreau.
Twenty twenty-one is the first year since 1937 the U.S. population grew by fewer than one million people. The lowest numeric growth since at least 1900 (Census Bureau began annual population estimates).
Does this matter? Only if you are a nervous white person as immigrants to the US appear to have larger families. Eventually, everyone blends.
Back to a point, I will get to shortly. Dean Baker:
"The gains from higher productivity should swamp the impact of a rising ratio of retirees to workers."
Getting beyond these issues of a growing population of retirees.
"The question is whether societies will really suffer if they see a secular decline in population over many decades. While it is fashionable among intellectual types to assert that falling populations are a disaster, the logic for this argument is lacking.
The essence of the disaster story is that we will have fewer workers to support a growing population of retirees. The implication is that either retirees will have to get by with less money or workers will face an impossible tax burden.."
Two points Dean makes:
- "The impact of normal productivity growth swamps the impact of demographic changes, and
- It’s not clear that supply constraints (i.e., too few workers, too many retirees) are even the main problem facing aging societies. The widely accepted story of “secular stagnation” is that aging societies suffer from too little demand, the complete opposite problem of too few workers."
Concluding:
"Taking these in turn, it should be clear to anyone familiar with economic data that even modest rates of productivity growth have far more impact on living standards than changing demographics. The years 2010 to 2025 are the peak years of the retirement of the baby boom cohort in the United States. The Social Security Trustees project that the aged dependency ratio (the number of people over age 65 divided by the number of people between the ages of 20 and 64) will increase from 0.218 in 2010 to 0.325 in 2025.
We can plausibly see more rapid rates of productivity growth. If productivity growth were to average 2.0 percent over a 15-year period, roughly the post-World War II average, the before-tax real wage would rise by almost 35 percent. This would allow for a gain in after-tax income for both workers and retirees of more than 20 percent, even with the rapid increase in the ratio of retirees to workers associated with the retirement of the baby boomers."
Is there an issue? Dean Baker who is far more knowledgeable than I am on this topic does not see it this way. "Declining Populations is a Problem for Politicians, Policy Types, and Pundits."
Being a productivity and manufacturing hired gun, I agree with his thoughts. My version here is choppy. I suggest you read his version for far more context than the miniscule detail I offer here. You can find it here with additional thoughts: https://angrybearblog.com/2023/02/declining-population-and-diminished-national-power-is-bad-news or at his site: https://cepr.net/aging-populations-and-great-power-politics-the-problem-is-for-the-elites-not-the-masses/
Are we in trouble? The depression was serious as well at Wall Street blowing up Main Street in 2008. We just got through a vicious pandemic with many people resisting. The burden on SS and Medicare has been somewhat lessened with their passing.
Bill: I have posted information with regard to the history of social security in the US. I am sorry that I have not followed or examined the proposal you have put forward.
Thank you for sharing, Fern. I have tried to explain this to my young adult children, this is an excellent, concise article and I am going to share it with them.
Social Security and Medicare are dead if the Republicans ever retake both Houses and the Presidency
I don't think it's that simple. If they killed Social Security and Medicare, loads of them would be voted out of office, and a lot of them realize that.
You're assuming that there would ever be another free vote if the Republicans retake both houses and the presidency. If they are able to end Social Security and Medicare, they will be aware of the consequences and will not allow themselves to be voted out of office.
Democracy is not a given in this country. Some will defend it while others will seek personal advantage by working to end it. You cannot assume that we are all playing by the same rules.
Democracy certainly isn't a given. Heather has said it plainly today, and my blood runs cold.
I think it's important to add the qualifier that if the CURRENT VERSION OF the Republicans retake both houses and the presidency, there might never be another free vote.
As Heather has pointed out, parties can change dramatically over time. And our system does not mathematically make room for more than two major parties. So while the CURRENT VERSION of the Repubs is deeply dangerous, in half a century it could well be the other way around. They care about power. One or two hard elections won't be enough to grow some sense, but another one or two...
Pedantic, I know, but I think it's essential not to rhetorically hem ourselves in.
True, Will. Though sitting down here in Florida watching the DeSantis regime wreak havoc instills a sense of immediacy that makes me less sanguine of the long term. The athletic board decided not to require girls report their menstrual history. The legislative answer? Dissolve the board and replace with DeSantis appointees. Don’t even get me started on his crony heavy plan to reform the college system. So much of the future, as always I suppose, will be a story of rebuilding.
My scary-optimistic hope is that DeSantis' continued success in Florida will lead to continued overreach, and that two more years of ever more outrageous actions will make him unelectable outside of complete MAGA states. If nothing else, he is providing all the material needed for the 2024 Democratic campaign ads, if he happens to be the candidate.
I'm genuinely sorry that Floridians have to deal with him the interim, but he is revealing more and more of a truly authoritarian personality and it will hopefully do him in before too long.
Certainly both the Democratic and Republican parties have noticeably changed in my lifetime. Like entropy, the lure of big lies and treachery never goes away, but if enough turn against it, even the Republican Party might improve, assuming they are OK with with retaining the tainted label.
Unfortunately, Republican party is totally infused with crazy religious nuts now--and they don't just care about power, they are cultists on a mission. Sense won't get knocked into people who have beliefs they think are 'superior' to our laws. They'll just ignore the laws because they are 'special'. Don't forget the attempt to cobble together a bunch of fake electors in the last election, or the ridiculous lawsuits of Kari Lake and others that are gumming up our court system today.
You are making the same assumption that Democrats have been making since the 80s to our great detriment. That Republicans operate in good faith and that they care about the results. These are the people who were responsible for hundreds of thousands of needless deaths from COVID, who supported an actual violent insurrection, and still get re-elected. They are willing to drive us over the cliff. If you look at what they have been trying to do in earnest since the Powell Memo, you will realize that the ensuing chaos is a feature, not a bug, for them.
Exactly, a bug that needs to be stomped on!
I'm not assuming any good faith from GOPers, if you were responding to my comment.
Ah yes. Genocide by Protracted Neglect. What a plan. What a plan. Nefarious and wrapped in their own version of platitudes. White Racism at its most frightening.
Yes, but they also know that the ‘sheep’ don’t have long memories, so they will forget that come election time. Plus you have your staunch voters “my daddy was a Republican and by God, I’m voting Republican!” Hell, Donald Duck could put his name on the ballot as Republican candidate and they’d vote for him!
Bad example tho. Donald Duck would never make it past the primary. Sure, he has the anger issues the base desires, as well as the connections to Uncle Scrooge. But his membership in the Three Caballeros would start rumors about Mexican ancestry, and the lack of pants would be seen as too LGBT-accepting.
But he IS white, and his too tight shirts give a nod to the members of Meal Team Six.
Will And the “Republicans’ would serve duck a la orange at their MAGA fundraisers. Perhaps they would prefer Mickey Mouse, who is closer to their rat ancestry.
This reminds me of my WW II experience on a farm where, as the youngest kid, I was responsible for ‘dispatching’ and then plucking the ducks. Have you ever plucked a duck?
🤣
Never thought of Donald as a "brother" now...
I love all these analogies yo my “Donald Duck”,. They are great, and honestly I guess I should have thought some before using him. But, he is a “Donald”, and he is a cartoon character, which gives me the thought I should have said “char toon character on the ballot” and the sheep of the current GOP would vote for them, damn their platform other than “MAGAA”!
Approved by the "Theater of the Absurd" Lovely Metaphore Will.
They want to do it by slight of hand, like what they did to defined benefit pensions.
Just the reason we need to call them out on every stupid move they make, every single day. Keep reminding people just how ignorant they truly are.
Can't just end these programs instantly. It is essentially a contract so someone who paid in for 45 years and is retiring the day GOP votes to end it has rights to the benefits they paid for. So any mechanism to unwind it would be a complicated mess subject to judicial oversight.
Where is the contract written? It's not a personal retirement program where you get what you paid in. It's an insurance program so that when we are elderly or infirm, we don't end up in a poorhouse or in the gutter. It's based on compassion and the greater good, two things that the Republicans actively are opposing and have been since the New Deal.
watch them
Don’t expect much “judicial oversight” from the Republican courts.
This is exactly the reason we must work like hell to vote them all out of office. It’s the only way we will keep our democracy strong.
I have posted this remark by Lincoln before, but believe it clarifies a fundamental truth:
“That is the issue that will continue in this country when these poor tongues of Judge Douglas and myself shall be silent. It is the eternal struggle between these two principles -- right and wrong -- throughout the world. They are the two principles that have stood face to face from the beginning of time, and will ever continue to struggle. The one is the common right of humanity and the other the divine right of kings.”
Like our battles with disease, the fight with authoritarianism is never won, only to a greater of lesser extent contained.
The Republican Study Committee’s Blueprint to “ Save” America/ Fiscal Year 2023 Budget
Proposals for Medicare/ SS/ SSDI start page 68.
https://banks.house.gov/uploadedfiles/rsc_2023_budget_final_version.pdf
That looks awful.
I hate that we have to share this country with such greedy and unempathetic people. May you never lose your benefits, which I'm sure you earned.
Yeah, well. Those Voldemort Scott cuts to government jobs and selling off of “non-essentials” is timed perfectly for the perfect storms we’ve seen due to climate change. Let go of those FEMA slackers and such and see how well that plays out in the midst of another Katrina, Joplin Tornado, now-typical season of wildfires in the West (and increasingly across the U.S.). Cut those emergency relief humans and capabilities when a Norfolk Southern trainload of toxic chemicals derails outside of Pittsburg or some other major population center and see how that goes. Republicans have set us up for this nightmare of having to play catch-up and unscrew after each Republican administration further hollows out the middle class by protecting the oligarchs -- our sacred one percent of the wealthiest Americans who are protected as if they are looking out for the rest of us, sharing the rewards of everyone’s hard work as opposed to greedily grabbing stock buybacks, record profits, and protecting shareholders over employees.
As God is my witness the battle between Carter and Reagan, and Reagan’s win, has haunted and continues to haunt us. It is perilously close to impossible to unscrew thanks to the sales job the great communicator mouthpiece put over on folks.
I love HCR, that you point out repeatedly the economic cluster-botch Reagan, Rove, Cheney and the Kochs engineered. It is in such contrast to Biden’s building an economy from the bottom up and the middle out.
As Jimmy Carter, our greatest American former President is hospice tonight, I hope all who lauded Reagan for his slick communications skills will stack that unctuous and fatuous acting talent against the 50+ years of Mr. Carter’s post-presidency, spent in earnest hard work on behalf of the poor, Democracy, Human Rights, Civil Rights, humanitarian endeavors to prevent River Blindness, homelessness, the relentless savagery of brutal dictators. This man stood fearlessly in jungles, he and his wife, counting votes and overseeing elections to encourage and protect democracy around the world. Oh! And there were Carter’s energy policies that Rove, Reagan, Cheney, Kochs and the rest scoffed at as they ripped solar panels off of the White House roof as soon as Reagan took office, as if to say Carter’s energy policies were a joke. Scores of oil spills, blow-ups, severe weather and countless climate crisis deaths and losses later, where are Republicans who have the sense and humility to own those energy policy disasters based on lies oil companies promulgated to protect the industry and profits while temperatures increase, ice gaps melted, and Miami and other sea level cities see flooding as the new normal?
I’m sad about Carter. I am a native Georgian who dropped out of college for a year in 1976 to work on his campaign, traveling and handling all manner of projects and events during the primaries, general election before returning to finish school while at the same time helping with the inauguration. In the run up to Carter’s inevitable passing and State Funeral, I hope he is remembered for being a leader with integrity, foresight, faith, genius, and an incomparable dedication to God, family, and humanity. I am so glad Biden made the visit to Plains in 2021. And that he was the first U.S. Senator to endorse Carter in 1976.
Thanks for educating us, Heather, and for evoking memories and stirring passions on a cold winter’s night.
We are so grateful for you.
Deeply sad as well about Jimmy Carter, one of the greatest Americans. If only even half our country could have his ideals, integrity, and industriousness, we would be a much better place indeed.
Less sad than I would be otherwise, though, because he has lived very long and very well, long and well enough to receive a portion of the appreciation he deserves.
Youngest Nuclear submarine captain the Navy has ever had.
My sentiments too, Carey! Jimmy Carter exemplifies an endangered species: the politician with integrity who professes AND practices true Christian values!
Exactly!
I would prefer to call these true "Moral Values" as embraced by most civilized groups of people of Faith regardless of their origin.
Rebekha, I almost wrote those very same words, but given the intertextuality of previous days’ LFAA comments about amoral politicians claiming to be “Christian,” I decided it was a propitious opportunity to remind us that there are a few true Christian politicians. I must confess I cannot think of another example at this time.
Christian — in the old sense of the word — politician? Oxymoron.
Christ would likely be flippin’ a lot of tables over were he to show up in Congress, where the modern day money changers are.
Sorry, carey, but Carter WAS a politician and he IS a Christian. No oxymoron there. Most other self-avowed “Christian” politicians, yes, oxymorons.
Thank you so much, Carey, for heralding Jimmy Carter. I was proud to work in his White House for a time, though mine was not a politically-appointed position. I am grateful for your post. I hope others will see him as you have.
And the many other learned folks who add value to our conversations here on the substack. These conversations give me hope that we can overcome the mass illiteracy we are exposed to by the poorly educated, such being by design of the self-proclaimed Patriots who practice deceit in all their actions.
Thanks for posting and continue the good fight in Georgia. I too campaigned for Carter in Oregon--he was such an underdog at the time, no one expected him to win. But he ran a tight race, had good people.
Check out The Outlier, by Kai Bird, a really comprehensive biography of Carter's Presidency. Full disclosure, related to me, but he stands on his own credentials, a Pulitzer Prize winning historian.
Thanks for book recommend. I found an NPR interview with him and was very impressed. I realized that though I was part of that period that there a lot about his presidency that I am unaware of (single mom working and going to school syndrome). Our library is in process of moving temporarily to the Town Hall (while renovations are done- one whole year!). When things have settled a bit for them, I'll give a call and see if they have the book (interlibrary loan if not).
Thank you for bringing us back to the topic of Heather's post today. And for honoring Jimmy Carter. I have been going over in my mind and heart the outsize influence he and Roselyn have had on us as human beings, a legacy that goes way beyond what he attempted to do during his time as President. I am grateful for his long life, and for his dedication to human and spiritual values. I think a good many of our younger citizens have, knowingly or not, been deeply influenced by his example of action and caring. We all can help carry it forward in our own lives and actions. As Carter showed, even small things can have a large impact.
Thank you, Carey. Beautiful post. Deepest appreciation for President Carter.
I live in Georgia. I am so tired of and embarrassed by our state’s Republican politicians, especially Marjorie T Greene. I pray for clarity and sanity to return to the GOP. I have become an independent voter with Democratic leanings.
Take heart, 'hold your head high'...Frani Willis is going to make you proud to from GA!
Seems there are more of us Independents these days than members of either of two main current parties.
Indeed!
For several years I have suspected that, if given the opportunity, Republicans would sell off our public lands to private developers and the extraction industry in order to (ostensibly) pay down the national debt. It is likely they would even approve selling portions of the land to foreign entities.
This must never be allowed. Our public lands are a national treasure that, once lost, we will never get back. In an age of anthropogenic climate change and looming environmental catastrophe, we need to be more protective of the commons--whether that be land, water, air, or our fellow creatures--not less. We need less private ownership (or at least ownership contingent upon the well-being of the commons and of surrounding communities), not more.
This isn't 1787 anymore, and many of the assumptions upon which our American way of life is built, and especially our economic way of life--such as the infinite abundance and resilience of nature, and the notion that humans have, by divine entitlement, an unmitigated right, or even duty, to plunder and exploit the planet in service of our unquenchable lust for material gain, convenience, and amusements--have proven to be not merely wrong, but egregiously so.
It may be that law cannot make people see right, but it'll have to do until this fog of ignorance lifts from our public consciousness and we begin to realize that all things are connected and that we must attend to the world around us with a spirit of wonder, gratefulness, and reciprocity.
Kenneth James
Beautifully, perfectly said.
Wow, Kenneth James. You finally landed your space ship. Remarkably sanguine. Welcome home.
You know what gets me going, and going HARD?
The trope the phony debt hawks (everyone from Joe Manchin on right) trot out to frame their stinginess as compassion: "We just can't leave this mountain of debt to the next generation." How solemnly delivered these words always are. How eminently reasonable the speaker of them always imagines themselves. They always - always - follow this up with how we need to make some "hard choices" to "be responsible."
Except the right choice isn't hard to see. There are only two choices: cut programs, or raise revenue.
DEAR SWEET GOSH AND HIS SON JEEPERS... ****RAISE REVENUE!!!!!****
Almost every domestic program currently in place suffers from the problems of underfunding and redundant red tape, not superfluousness. It's not just SS & Medicare; almost every domestic program is there for a clearly identified reason, took a heck of a lot of effort to establish, and would be missed by a lot of suddenly sad and angry people if it went away, even if they didn't know it existed prior to it going away. The Repubs - cowards all, really - know this. When it comes time to cut, they can't seem to face the potential consequences. But the only alternative to piling on more debt is unthinkable to them.
RAISE REVENUE.
You care about what you're leaving to future generations? Ask THEM what they think about the issue, why dontcha? I'm younger than almost every member of Congress, so let me briefly appoint myself spokesperson. Or actually, I don't have to. We already collectively spoke our opinion through our votes last election, and the one before that, and the one before that. Our opinion is that we want more programs, not fewer, we want them to be more robust and directly effective, and we want you to do this while ALSO lowering the debt by doing the only obviously remaining option:
RAISE REVENUE.
Preferably on people who could dance gleefully around a bonfire of Ben Franklins bills each night and never burn enough to have to part with their planet-ruining jet. But, hey, I'll pitch in too. Whatever.
But if you refuse to drop the horsesh!t that to RAISE REVENUE is some kind of sacrilege, kindly shut your condescending wrinkly dry mouth, because we all know who is "responsible" for this debt, and it is you and your rich corporate friends.
In the name of dear sweet Yaweh, Allah, Vishnu, and Buddah, and whatever moon wizard they still pray to in some corner of the Amazon, RAISE REVENUE READ MY NIKES THEY SAY "JUST DO IT" I TRIPLE DOG DARE YOU
R
A
I
S
E
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
Good night.
Will, I believe I recall you stating you were 27? 28? years old. You have reached a level of maturity that I still haven't reached at 66---and that many will NEVER achieve.
Someday, young sir, I believe the future holds elected office for you, or at least, widespread positive media influence. I hope that I am still alive and able to support your endeavors, whatever they might be. Please don't make me wait too long though!
Thank you, Gayle. You are a gem. And a remarkable writer, and I don't mind at all you taking the mantle of spokesperson. You speak for me as my younger self, and for me as the elder lady I have become. You are one of the reasons that I am feeling optimistic about our future, along with all the younger folks who are speaking up, speaking out, and taking action.
"One person there told Jack Detsch and Robbie Gramer of Foreign Policy, 'To me, the subtext was clear: We’re not the crazies like the small handful of House Republicans you see in the headlines so often.'"
Still, the thought simply must be emerging in anyone looking at the U.S. from the outside and possessing a mind with capacity to think: "How does a democracy of the people place such crazies into positions of power?" We need to clarify that answer for ourselves and plug whatever path of partisan corruption allows crazies to gain such access. We cannot afford the damage imparted by the "small handful" we already have.
We need to get rid of the undemocratic electoral college, for one.
Gutting of public school system produces dim-witted voters. Look at how deSantis is gutting FL schools.
...and books...and universities...and dictating everyone's speech
A Mitch McConnell quote worth noting in that Foreign Policy article: “ Don’t look at Twitter, look at people in power,” he said. “My party’s leaders overwhelmingly support a strong, involved America and a robust trans-Atlantic alliance.”
https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/02/18/congress-munich-security-conference-russia-ukraine/?tpcc=recirc_latest062921
Right?! Didn't mean to pun but just happened. His "party's leaders" (and he is still a big one) have been gerrymandering the voting process as fast as they can everywhere they can for years now. Nice try to come across as a bipartisan engaging politician. We seem to be fooled here but I doubt our European friends are.
And after Jan 6 refused to impeach TFG, who damaged our relationships with our allies.
OH yes lets send everything out to the private sector. I'm a Fed employee. I am in Aviation. (That's a huge hint... and no I'm not a controller) Last month when everything ground to a halt and peoples flights were grounded it was because of a Contractors equipment and its contractors maintained. Yeah... lets keep doing that. Did you know that the Federal Govt "GIVES" for free information that private companies then package up and makes people pay for it. Then when that agency has an issue like last month the private companies come back and sue the agency and they generally win and get money out of us. All because there was an interruption.
Privatizing is itself a scam to award contracts in exchange for financial support of campaigns. Rick ‘scamming’ Scott.
As another example, the National Weather Service gives it taxpayer-paid information collection to every weather foeecasting outlet to then make money with. Wtf.
Luckily, tfg's nominee to head NOAA, Barry Myers (former CEO of the predatory Accu-weather) never ended up in that seat! Myers's aim was to completely hollow out and officially privatize NWS.
Thankfully, Biden brought us an actual scientist - oceanographer - to fill that position.
-- former NWS employee (lifelong weather weenie)
My Dad worked for the US Weather Bureau, then NOAA, and think he retired before it became the NWS. I, too, am a lifelong weather weenie!
Interesting, Alley!! Yay for your Dad!! And YOU!! Wx Weenies Unite!! Have you ever read The Perfect Storm??? Sooo well written... about the macho politics of US Weather Bureau vs. Cuban weather experts, and the long, slow approach (with ALL the signs from Nature) of that hurricane that decimated Galveston ~1903.
I haven't read The Perfect Storm yet; I will get a copy. Sounds fascinating!
It's an incredible piece of work. And will haunt you forever after. Still haven't visited Galveston yet. I've heard that some of the damage remains from that storm. Lemme know what you think!
Ugh.
GOP Infighting. Let the games begin!! -- Can't wait to see what kind of budget proposal they can possibly agree on. The rift is growing if (as this Letter details) McConnell and many of the Senate Republicans are not going to follow the lead of the crazies in the House.
It doesn’t matter whether McConnell and a few other Republican Senators aren’t like the crazies in the House because upwards of 70 million American voters are most definitely like the crazies in the House. That’s how the crazies in the House got into the House. Even if by some miracle we continue to outvote the 70+ million, the margins will be narrow, and the crazies will fight tooth and nail against whatever laws we manage to pass or policies we manage to put in place. Remember: it doesn’t take much to bring down the house. A population that includes a few percent of highly motivated crazies can make the country impossible to govern, democratically, for generations.
Mitch McConnell is a master crazy. His handling of the Garland nomination drove our judicial system off the cliff and he said it was the highlight of his career. He will pontificate and lie to his grave. He is not the adult in the room.
The Garland situation was not crazy though. It was a cold, ruthless maneuver to grab a level of power, and it turned out to be well-judged.
The Venn diagram between crazy and awful has some overlap, yes, but they are not mutually inclusive. Mitch McC IS the adult in the room. It's just a room of very, very awful people.
I guess it depends on your definition of crazy.
Yes, I think you’re right on McConnell’s mental state, but, I repeat, that is not the crux of the problem, which is that 70+ million American voters will do anything they can, including the dismantling of the US democracy, to put in place a government that will have, as a top priority, punishing people that the 70+ million don’t like. When they reach that goal, they will find themselves with a government that will put 90% of its people in a status simillar to that of medievsl serfs, albeit with different jobs. Most of them know this in their bones but still think it will be worth it, as long as they see the prople they don’t like persecuted by their government.
Agree ... Yes! Except with the last sentence, tho i used to believe it was precisely that. Beginning to see it a bit more thru a different lens.
At this point, it now seems to me that their real goal is to blow up the entire system because it never serves them at all. Instead, it messes them over, no matter who is 'in power.'
And that seems to be a function of their realizing on some level that our issues are not Right vs. Left. They are Up vs. Down. Establishment vs. Everyone Else. And they are looking to upset the Establishment and push them off the throne.
So yeah, they probably do wanna see those they don't like persecuted by their gov't. However, they're genuinely wanting and needing a country and gov't. that serves them... too. Just my evolving perspective.
I think your guess about the motivations of the white working class has a lot in common with mine: White, working-class Americans want a return to the system that was firmly in control from 1619 to 1965 because that system served them better than the one envisioned by 1960s legislation on civil rights, voting rights, affirmative action, and the like. The white working class opposes, by roughly a three-to-one margin, any diminishment of their enormous, systemic advantages. Archie Bunker made this clear. His view is their view, and it’s not irrational, but to believe that Archie Bunker’s view is anti-establishment would be irrational. This may be where your guess differs from mine about the motivations of white Americans. I think they consciously endorse the establishment. They vote for Republicans because that is the party that, since a couple decades after the Civil War, has provided a home for people who want to preserve (and increase!) systemic advantages for white Americans. A few Republicans may have lost their mojo for a few years in the 1960s. Maybe they mistakenly thought the passing of civil rights legislation was a long-term shift in the wind. They soon discovered the error, adopted the Southern Strategy in 1968, and have never looked back. White, working-class Americans who vote for Republicans understand this. They know the Republican Party is the establishment party, and they want Republicans in office who will flaunt the power of the establishment, not people who pay lip service to fair treatment for all Americans. Republicans in the lip-service business aren’t vicious enough for them. Republicans, including white, working-class Americans who vote for Republicans, are not irrational. Like all Republicans, they’re just stingy and mean.
Agreed.
Well, Steve, there may be a limit to what McConnell can stomach from his party's House crazies, but he hasn't reached it yet, at least not publicly. Compare his immediate post Jan. 6th speech against Trump's attempted coup with his vote not to convict Trump following the second impeachment. The only thing we can be sure of is that defeating Democrats is his main priority, perhaps his only priority.
Yerp. Time for our routine reminder that Mitch McC is a soulless crocodile who has mastered the low art of appearing comparatively calm and reasonable, just enough to get to gullible to set foot in the lake in time to have their chance of a decent livelihood chomped.
Absolutely true that McConnell will take whichever position keeps him and the GOP in power (and that's why he changed his tune after very few Republicans followed his lead post-Jan 6th), but there is no love lost between McConnell and Trump. If McConnell sees the House crazies as limiting his ability to hold power and influence, then he will oppose them.
If the Christian Nationalists want an authoritarian government to support their world views, let them move to Hungary or Russia. They don't need to f*ck up the US just because they are scared of diversity. What about religious freedom? No one is telling them they can't practice their religion, what gives them the idea that they can tell others how they can worship? Christ would roll over in his catacomb at the very smell of these people. I bet he wishes he could throw lightening bolts like Zeus did.
Remember, "America, Love It or Leave It?"
Well, I love it. How about THEY leave it? All the restriction they want to unpopularly enact to fix our "permissive" society are already in place in wonderful places like Afghanistan. Why don't they just move there and save themselves the effort. Or Nicaragua, if they want to save the boat fare.
Oh, wait. They probably only want somewhere like that where it's mostly WHITE people. And a Walmart within walking distance. Welp, I guess they're crud outta luck then, aren't they?
ON the very rare occasions that I enter a Walmart, trust me on this, Will: doesn't look like a lot of them do much walking. I do not mean that as an insult, just an observation I've made a number of times while waiting at the front of the store for my shopping companion.
Yes, Miselle, many disabled people shop at Walmart, because it is inexpensive. And they use the battery carts, or walk and move slowly. Is that what you meant by your rather odd comment?
They can go to Hungary, or Russia...