Since right-wing insurrectionists stormed the Capitol on January 6 with the vague but violent idea of taking over the government, observers are paying renewed attention to the threat of right-wing violence in our midst. For all our focus on fighting socialism and communism, right-wing authoritarianism is actually quite an old threat in our country. The nation’s focus on fighting “socialism” began in 1871, but what its opponents stood against was not government control of the means of production—an idea that never took hold in America—but the popular public policies which cost tax dollars and thus made wealthier people pay for programs that would benefit everyone. Public benefits like highways and hospitals, opponents argued, amounted to a redistribution of wealth, and thus were a leftist assault on American freedom.
On January 21, 2017, tens of millions of peaceful protesters gathered (not one single incidence of violence) and showed tremendous unity. Unfortunately, the pride of that day never stood a chance of raising the level of consciousness of a madman (or his enablers and followers) who had stolen his first election. Our government completely unraveled for the next 4 years. My non profound observation over the decades is that too often violence is the catalyst for change.
Our history of peaceful elections and transfer of power (without military assistance) have been a safe haven. Now, 10’s of thousands of troops (very necessary) occupy D.C. so the 46th president (fairly, legally elected) can take the oath of office without getting killed and to prevent any attempts at another coup. It is heartbreaking but is the reality few actually thought would be seen in modern times.
Maintaining a democracy and rule of law takes work by an educated, informed, and involved electorate. We must not ever forget; never again.
I participated in the Women’s March and several other marches in 2017. Absolute calm, peace and unity. The insurrectionists on January 6 never planned to march peacefully. They went to start a war and over-through the government. What upside down thinking to violently seek to overthrow a democratic election, because you want... a democracy.
Yes, those marches generated a universal sense of calm, peace, and unity. What happened on January 6th is beyond the pale. They were not protesters, they were anarchists and terrorists.
Yes, thank you! I want this point to continue to be raised and I am so concerned that those involved will just get a slap on the wrist... and we will have failed again to hold accountability. Rule of law must be reinstated.
Yes, Biden's impulse to bring the country together must not override the imperative to punish the insurrectionists, wherever they are: back home or in the halls of Congress.
I and my spouse, along with a close friend and her spouse, have attended several marches together since January 2017 - Women's Marches, Marches for Our Lives, advocacy marches with and for immigrants, and Earth Day marches - in our state's capitol. All were peaceful and well-attended. Those who ended up entering the Capitol Bldg here in Olympia did so with pre-arranged appointments with senators and representatives. No weapons, no injuries, no deaths.
Since the 2020 election armed pro-T**** marchers have clashed with counter-protestors multiple times, with at least one shooting by a T****ster. They stormed the Governor's Residence on January 6. There is a bill up for consideration in this legislative session to outlaw open carrying of firearms to protests, but as of today, it's still legal for these guys to parade the streets of our state capitol fully armed. On top of this unrest, the pandemic, the ongoing BLM protests, the increasing number of unhoused people living in tents close to downtown, it is going to take a long time for our little business district to revive. Every time I drive through downtown, I see another closed and boarded up storefront. As the outgoing POTUS used to be so fond of tweeting, SAD (although I mean it in such a different way).
I don't think there is anything more disheartening and frightening than a bunch of guys roaming the streets carrying what look like assault weapons openingly and brazenly. The only reason to do that is to intimidate and/or actually kill people. Yes, it is very sad.
How about everybody who doesn't have the slightest idea what an "anarchist" is just STOP calling everybody they don't like (or agree with) "anarchists." I've numbered myself an anarchist for about fifty years and I a pretty much on what every subscriber to this blog would consider that of "the angels." It is sloppy, lazy and intellectually vacuous to call everybody you don't like an "anarchist." I thought doing so was more or less from the playbook of the last president. But I guess not.
Am I missing something? Hasn’t anarchy historically always been associated with the left wing? My understanding is that anarchy is about hierarchy and a vision (Murray Bookchin comes to mind) that is very much anti-capitalist. I suppose libertarianism blurs the lines and anarchy might be thought of as a natural endpoint of libertarianism, but without social protections just becomes a power hierarchy where the rich may do as they wish and therefore constrain the freedom of the poor.
I just read back my comment and the one above that prompted it, and I realized that the reason things seem upside down is that I am still thinking in terms of people wanting to do what is right, as responsible people do. But those who attacked the Capitol on January 6 and their leader, Donald Trump, use conventional language to mean something entirely different. For instance, when I say democracy, I mean government by and for all the people; when Trump and his followers use that term, they mean government by and for select groups of people. I have learned recently that this deliberate misuse of terms is part of the psychological technique called gaslighting, which attempts to cause people to doubt their convictions. This is why I've been leaning on the dictionary and various other references a lot lately, including our Constitution. I feel an almost constant need to refer to standards. And when speaking, it seems terribly important to chose words carefully, to speak (or write) with precision, and to call out imprecision when encountered and make those speaking (or writing) define the terms they use.
Becky - I’ve been experiencing the same thing. I have until recently never enjoyed learning any kind of history. After a friend told me about Letters from an American, I became hooked! I have been devouring books about American history, particularly regarding the Civil War, but also books and articles about caste systems, political figures, behavioral psychology, neuroscience, and other topics, learning all I can to understand how we got here and how peoples’ beliefs came to be. The more I learn, the more I feel I am understanding people with opposing beliefs. Are there extremists? Yes. Are there non-extremists who are simply people who believe that their values and beliefs are being challenged? Yes. Bottom line is we are all people and like it or not we are all in this together. And we need to be able to speak and communicate using a common language. Words matter. How communication is framed matters. Civility matters.
I am reminded of how powerfully words can communicate in an instant (read George Lakoff, now I see examples everywhere!). Passed a billboard yesterday for an attorney. Headline: Injury Justice. With just two words this communication is framed to make you feel that if you were injured, you were wronged. And this lawyer is already on your side and will help you get what you deserve because you were clearly wronged by someone else. Truly powerful. Politicians have been using this kind of framing too. Think about that. Words matter. It is as you say (Becky) “it seems terribly important to chose (sic) words carefully.”
Yes words are powerful— interestingly though one of the first things I noticed about DT was his limited vocabulary. It’s like a backward sixth grader. Coming after Obama’s formidable language skills in terms of speaking and writing, what a thud.
Liz, I used to think Trump spoke in simplistic language to appeal to his base and deliberately avoided sophisticated language that was unfamiliar to them. When we discovered he reads almost nothing that doesn’t contain his own name embedded in it and stumbles over somewhat sophisticated words written for him on the TelePrompTer, his true illiteracy was revealed. “Think before you speak. Read before you think.” -Fran Lebowitz
That shocked me too, and it took me a while to realize that he doesn't give a rat's ass for me or people like me who try hard to paint clear ideas with words. But he does care for the kind of people who resent the kind of people who try hard to paint clear ideas with words, so he does just the opposite.
I often thought Obama was too good. I LOVE him, but if a newspaper should be written at a 5th grade level, then, when speaking to the public, our leaders should - without condescension - also communicate at that level.
Lena - I too have become fascinated with history thanks to Letters From An American. I also see that we ignore history to our peril. I wish I could agree that we are all in this together. Yes, civility matters, understanding the power of language matters. But it also matters to face the fact, as Richardson writes, that racism is deeply embedded in what may appear to be our most innocent beliefs - as in the white American brand of anti-socialist "liberty". Recent neuroscience research confirms that we all have the same physical brain but we can develop vastly different mind sets. I no longer know how to use language, civility, logic to bridge that gap. It's beyond me. Perhaps this almost coup will begin our long, slow awakening so that we, as a nation, may finally face our dark history.
Becky and Lena - Your comments reveal how important the teacher is in inspiring the student. If the teacher is fascinated by the topic, her students are likely to be also.
Though many of us are older than our professor, HCR, we are definitely her students. These discussions remind me of the better seminars in grad school. I would have stayed at university forever if it had been possible, but this forum keeps my mind from getting dull and fuzzed over with moss.
Yes, excellent advice. Read George Lakoff -- if you don't want to be framed...
If you really get down to the implications of his writing, that could be a liberating experience. Amost alll westerners, especially Americans, are self-incarcerated prisoners locked into their mental habits, concepts, blind beliefs, prejudices. Even the very word Liberty gets hammered into the bars of a mental prison -- for those whose cells still have windows.
"Liberty and justice for all” can be a frame to unite progressives. Our language and writing and speech would augment this frame with specifics, such as economic and racial justice, and justice for the earth, as we speak of universal health care, education and sustainability.
Thanks for your response, Lena. I'm with you on Heather's instigation to the study of history. Watching her FB chat on Jan 14, my husband (who takes time from work to watch) and I laughed with delight at her obvious delight at telling us real stories from the past. I've never seen anything like it. Just think if teachers in other disciplines could do the same!
You made me think of advertising and wonder how it fits in. You know, I often think of politics/current events as a huge, colorful graphic with bubbles and arrows, animated to show the bits that grow and shrink in relation to it all and to emphasize that one bit forces another this way or that. Something like Hans Rosling's animated statistics, or a Wait But Why cartoon set in motion. I can SEE that one thing influences another. Yesterday somebody recommended the book, Elmer Gantry, and I started to read it. Immediately there are Trump (Elmer) and Roger Stone (Elmer's pal, Jim).
I do wonder why we like to deceive each other. I don't. So why do some others?
Advertising used to “advertise” features and then later it was figured out that “benefits” are why people choose to purchase. And then psychology came into the advertising arena and ad execs learned that appealing to peoples’ sense of belonging (using Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs) could change a single purchase into a lifelong relationship which of course guaranteed corporate profits. Today people will intentionally spend more money on an identical product in terms of function and form simply because it has a particular name or logo on it. They want to “belong” to a certain group.
I’ve often recommended Lakoff, not so much because his ideas influence my own as because there's a correspondence. His central thesis about framing and the metaphor is one to which I'd given much thought decades earlier, when I was an eighteen-year old writing a treatise on painting. .
I was thinking at the time about various ways of relating to Nature, how we are in the world, how we see it, our place in it; and comparing painting in the Western tradition since the Renaissance with Chinese painting.
That may sound very esoteric, but it isn't really. Lakoff and many others speak of the influence of the 18th century Enlightenment, but there's much in our world view that goes back to the Renaissance, hundreds of years earlier.
Anyway, for Lakoff, I guess the starting point should be Metaphors We Live By, written with Mark Johnson. Reissued 2008.
Coming to the political implications of framing issues:
Moral Politics, How Liberals and Conservatives Think (3rd edition 2016)
And Don’t Think of an Elephant (revised edition, 2014
Well, I see you've been into these, but here's another useful short cut:
Good point Becky. I have frequently felt the effects of being gaslighted in conversation during the last four years. I too have demanded definitions during debate. Unfortunately without agreed upon definitions we aren’t really conversing. It is maddening if one really wants a conversation to end up just circling the point.
Logical argument doesn't work. We have to think of another way. In a past job in customer service, a teacher used the example of a runaway horse and carriage. Said rather than holding up your arm before it and shouting, "Stop!" you need to mount the horse (not sure how this was accomplished) and gradually slow it down. I understood this to mean that if you want to fix a customer's problem, you must listen to their argument carefully enough to understand how to "slow the horse down." You must be genuinely empathetic. This is very hard to do. I think something like this might work with Trump supporters, but it means facing my own biases and resentments, and so far I haven't been able to let them go well enough to get anywhere near that horse.
It is indeed hard to do. I have friends who are Republicans who are willing to engage in political conversations over lunch (pre-Covid). It is amazing to me that people I have so much in common with could have such opposing political views. But sitting across from them, one on one, allows for discussions that help to understand why this or that policy upsets them. In the end, it always comes back to them advocating for what they believe is best for themselves and their loved ones. Just like me. Perhaps it would be helpful to view others as “us” instead of “others”. Like when as a child in grade school teachers had us write letters to pen pals in foreign countries - in my case countries considered communist - so that we could see the humanity of those who lived there.
Also trying to read articles from sources supporting other views can expand your horizons as well as reading books with opposing viewpoints. For instance, I’m reading Blackout by Candace Owens to get a perspective on why some believe black people should abandon the Democrat Party. I’ll admit it isn’t easy to read because I disagree with her point of view, but I feel it is important to read so that I understand what the issues are - not her solutions. I believe I can think for myself. But I know I don’t know what someone else’s problems are. I’m a big reader, so this method helps me understand.
I haven’t re-read the Constitution recently, but I’ve sure done a lot of thinking about it. As Fiona Hill says in a January 11 op-ed on Politico (link on Jan. 17 HCR, easy to find), “Yes It Was A Coup,” American democracy has been stress tested. In a big way. I felt confident for four years, but still, who needs this level of anxiety. We are all about to breathe a very big sigh of relief. We passed the test, but boy, I have a lot of weaknesses been exposed.
Hi Roland! Someone made a comment on something I wrote which has taken me all the way back to HCR in January! Many of us have missed you on HCR's forum...hope your book writing is coming along!
Yes. The only thing he is good at is labeling in his upside-down world. Examples: trying to steal the election away from Biden while calling it “stop the steal”... degrading our country while calling it “make America great again”... professing to love the US military while trashing Gold Star families, allowing Russia to put bounties on our troops’ heads, and bending our military for his political optics.
It must be especially painful for you wonderful women who peacefully marched with your children and grandchildren, to now see such violent desecration of our Capitol, with the intent of killing elected officials and overturning our government. There couldn’t be a starker contrast.
My daughters are in their 30’s now. They have a clear perspective of when we were in DC marching several years back. We are a society now of where our mental health needs a lot of help.
I have marched too, and took 2 of my grandchildren to one. They participated by making signs beforehand and enjoyed the gathering of peaceful, like-minded people.
You have gotten to the root of the problem in (counting...) 13 words. This is a wound so deep and so wide that it cannot possibly heal itself. It's beyond time to stop going all Scarlett O'Hara, i.e., "I'll think about that tomorrow. Tomorrow is another day!" How now, right now?!
Though I have heard right-wing adherents claim that the US is not a democracy, but a republic. Again, a matter of definition; I think they’re making an argument for the US as an agglomeration of fifty states, with states’ rights superseding federal law. The claim against democracy (governance by the people through elected representatives) in favor of republicanism leads too easily to the idea of autocracy; it’s a bit of an apples and oranges comparison, and the fuzzy logic of the comparison makes it useful for dividing the electorate.
In reading this history of Right Wing illogic of ignoring laws against their taking of public lands for private use, I got a big picture of Medieval History (Also known as The Dark Ages), with little fiefdoms all over Europe run by local kings & barons with serfs being exploited.
I, too, marched in DC in 2017. A gathering of prescient patriots. I remember standing outside the fence that surrounded the inauguration grounds. Littered with the detritus of trumpists from the day before. Foreshadowing?
They absolutely did! I took pictures. Alas, this story did not make the news, but it SURE would have if I woulda tipped the first one over...I am quite sure the rest of them would have quickly fallen! A million women looking at padlock potties = definition of frustration. Dumped shot on Pennsylvania ave, yeah, that would have been news.
You can easily get good bolt cutters at Lowes or home depot. ( I like Home Depot because they require masks). Depending on the gauge of steel in the lock would determine how big of bolt cutters one would need. I think at least a foot of handle. Make sure you get the kind that has a mechanical advantage mechanism for really fast cutting/ease of use. And Practice on some locks so you know how to use them. ( I only say this, because, like with any tool, I've learned the hard way with the wrong tool or using it the wrong way.....many times.)
I’m with Pamsy. My first thought was bolt cutters. Fuck the assholes who put padlocks on those doors, it’s an easy fix. Porta potties do not come with padlocks. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a padlock on a porta-potty. Not ever. Some jerk had to buy padlocks and walk down that line and install them.
The story that was circulating was they were installed for the inauguration, not for us, so they were padlocked. There were rows and rows of hundreds if not 1000s.
I was there too. The locks had been busted off some of them. Do you remember how he made them put tape over the company's name on them? Don's Johns! Rotten person, terrible president, no sense of humor.
My daughters and 12 year old granddaughters accompanied me to the 2017 Women's March in Chicago, and to a March for our Lives demonstration ; I did not consider that we might be in danger, and we were not.
Agreed . . . we never felt unsafe! It was initially a passing thought when my friends and I headed into Boston (large crowds can be intimidating), but that immediately evaporated when we got closer and felt the positive energy (even though we all were revolted by trump) and goodwill in the crowds on the subways and streets. The police had a great time too!
I marched with a friend in a Women's March in Tucson AZ. It was wonderful, with women, men, children and dogs. And brilliant signs! But I have to admit I was on the alert, and checking the tops of buildings for men with guns. I thanked two of the policemen who were there to keep us safe. Their big smiles told me that they were unused to being thanked during an event like that.
I participated in the march in Boston in 2017. It was surreal in such a great way! trump and his followers have now tried to take from us the joy of the Biden/Harris Inauguration. However, even with no physical crowds, the barbed wire, and military protective presence, there is going to be a huge collective shout of joy once that oath of office is taken on January 20th!! It will be Zoomed around the world to an audience that far exceeds any other inauguration (with the possible exception of Obama's first)!
Using social media, New Yorkers began the nightly ritual of applauding and cheering health care workers at 7 pm every evening as a way to celebrate the efforts of those on the frontline of the Coronovirus pandemic. #ClapBecauseWeCare
Are there any physical distance/mask wearing, outside gatherings planned in each state to cheer Biden/Harris on and to be filmed as part of the inauguration?
I haven't heard of any in the greater Boston area. I think the potential for nutcases to appear throughout various cities is a deterrent for law abiding citizens to congregate. And, not least of all, given the surge in COVID cases (along with the more contagious strains now out there) I would think most (wise) people are not going to gather in crowds even outside and distanced.
I don’t know who the organIzers are, but I saw a Facebook post tonight for one in Denver. I commented, urging them to call it off.... as if anyone cares what I think. All the chatter on Twitter and Facebook is that there is violence planned in every Capitol this week. City and State governments want us to stay home. It’s a shame, but there will be other opportunities.
I was also at the crowd at the Boston 2017 "march" which was so huge it was actually a peaceful standing together. I was also among 6,000 at Faneuil Hall peacefully demonstrating to uphold the ACA. The latter was a particularly diverse crowd. In both local and national lawmakers addressed us. I had no fear of expressing my concerns or being in the crowd. My heart breaks that this is no longer possible, between the pandemic and fear of violence.
My experience as well! I travelled from California to Washington DC, where the marching route was ‘grid-locked’ by protesters, all peaceful! It was an amazing day especially knowing virtually every country on the planet in multiple cities was also protesting ... absolutely NO violence!!!
Yep: I was there too in KC with my brother and my then-partner. It was a wonderful day, but the thing that disturbed me a bit about these marches is how white they were. Many of the speakers in KC were BIPOC but the marchers themselves were not. This apparently was a national trend and discussions of how the Women's March has played out over the last four years exemplifies the struggle of the Women's Movement in general: it has always had trouble embracing diversity and inclusion; the leadership is mostly white, well-educated, and middle-class. Sigh. As a feminist this makes me a little nuts.
Well, as feminists we can look around for causes we believe in that are led by Black women, and support them. For now, for me, that means a monthly donation to Fair Fight. With Kamala Harris as VP (hooray!!!!), an administration committed to working for ALL the people, and room to push them in whatever we see as the best direction - I look forward to having to pick and choose between progressive causes to support.
The second time that I marched in Tucson, there was a large group from the Tonono O'odham nation with us, or we were with them... They were so proud to be there in their traditional clothing and musical instruments. The Vermont marches, where I live, were pretty much all-white due to our population.
My friends and I also noticed there weren’t a lot of women of color. I would not begin to know all the reasons why that happened but I think the marches that January helped ignite a wave of underserved communities and women being empowered to get elected and appointed to local, state, and federal positions where real change begins. Hillary Clinton, Michelle Obama and others have worked behind the scenes the past 4 years, to mentor women in the rough and tumble ways of politics and we need to keep that going.
My daughters and I were at the 2019 Women’s March in DC. I have participated in marches against injustices for 50 years. I loved being there. The energy fed off of everyone, man or woman, LGBTQ, all races, made me feel like I was being enveloped in understanding and love. It was awesome!
Too many Karens are out there for POC to trust white women. Their zealotry is often much worse than white men who are supremely comfortable and convinced they will do just fine no matter what changes--whereas the women are less secure.
Yeah I’m never going to use that expression. “Ivankas” works for me! My sister’s name is Karin, she is a sweetheart and a honey bunny and would never dream of taking advantage of anybody else with a power-play because she’s white. She would fit in really well right here on HCR.
After that day in 2017, American women spent the next 4 years saying ENOUGH! All the secrets we held to keep a toxic marriage, a toxic job, or a toxic government came bursting out as a testimony of our oppression. And as we had our day, we learned to listen to others who are systematically oppressed and ORGANIZED to change our fate.
That fate will not happen without pushback from those who feel they now have lost. These folks have used one method to maintain the upper hand - violence and terror.
The four of us (two MN friends, my young adult granddaughter, and I) invited Phyllis, an African American woman who didn't have a "posse" of her own, to join us. We five hung out together all day. Well, most of the day. Got separated 2:3 for a while, but reconnected eventually. Phyllis and I are still in touch periodically. Perhaps the makeup of our posse clouded my overall vision of diversity that day. What I do remember is having been kind of gobsmacked (in a good way) by the turnout of so many men for that march.
My only negative memory of the Women's March in 2017 was standing in line for around 40 minutes for a chance at a lone Porta potty and then discovering a long line of them on the Mall. Oh well, I got to talk to my friend Beth for a long time while we crossed our legs and danced!!
Dear Professor Cox Richardson (showing my respect for your work),
or dear Heather (showing my sentiments),
I am a new paying subscriber after having read the free version for some time, because "content must be paid by those who consume it" if we are to have a balanced information society.
I am an Austrian citizen, live on the edge of Vienna, with many ties to the United States of America, having lived there as an exchange student and having visited the country more than 80 times since then.
I engage in US politics and society because I see all around me in Europe and elsewhere that the US has a leading role in shaping global politics, global political and social values, global economic and environmental behavior and global culture.
Sometimes Twitter participants have told me "you are not from here, so stay out". That would be wrong, because just like US right-winger behavior (left, too, but less at this time) influences anti-democratic currents here in Europe, moderate and progressive US initiatives encourage similar initiatives in European society.
So, after having put my money where my mouth has been :-): Please continue your good work, Heather!
Yes, thanks for the reminder, Peter. I’m another European and, while you wrote, I’d not yet found the time to send in the remark that follows. Today’s letter gives much needed historical perspective to the current crisis, but…
All eyes in America are turned inward. All eyes throughout the world are turned on America. But this creates a dangerous diversion at a time when the effects of the imploding Trump presidency affect the entire world. And we should all know by now that, for dictators and gangster politicians, diversions are the very stuff of politics, distracting attention while they carry out whatever crimes they’ve been planning for the moment when opportunity knocks.
So Americans should not forget to keep an eye open for what’s happening elsewhere and to draw the necessary lessons, even where there’s no recourse to immediate remedial action.
Keep an eye on Moscow today. Endangered sclerotic regimes become more and more dangerous and more and more oppressive…
Yes, Peter Burnett. I would recommend the interview with Samantha Power, the incoming USAID Administrator, on Pod Save America last week. It's available on YouTube, I believe.
Yes, I've just looked. Thank heavens! What more can I say?
Except that reports of the activities of the We Wuz Robbed Party still sound more like the kind of news we might expect from the most world's newest and most unstable countries. And they're still talking of their bargain-basement Elmer Gantry and the Almighty in the same breath...
Only recently did I find that my contention about collective madness had been expressed better than I could ever put it by no less than Friedrich Nietzsche:
“In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.”
This is worse than Covid 19, but it's the combination between virus and delirium that's far more troubling. As Samantha Power put it:
“You can be shocked but not be surprised at the same time”.
I believe this is one of the big sources of the divide in American politics. Those of us who believe we are citizens of Planet Earth first, and Americans second, have the ability to look at the larger picture. We believe in nations working together for solutions that plague the world. We believe that nations need to support one another in saving the planet, setting fair trade regulations, preventing wars and responding to pandemics. Those who believe in America First don't care about the rest of the world, aren't capable of connecting their actions to a big picture, view those outside their immediate circles as Other. They respond to flashpoint terms such as Globalism, Radical Left, Socialism, Freedom without reflection. They say they want strong leaders but worship strongmen. Their ideas about individual liberties leave no room for the behavioral norms of the larger community.
While my place of birth and my government issued passport declare that I am an American, I have always put my citizenship of Earth in first position. National and state borders are artificial. Our shared humanity is indisputable fact.
Brilliant! This is the Golden Rule. This is love. Thank you for such a concise post describing our spiritual pandemic. tRump has amplified discontent, not respect for anything but the big ME. I do hope everyone reading content like this also find time to offset their worldview by reading books and articles from leaders who support Lanita's view, a positive view of how it can be if we all get on with it! I'm currently reading a book by John Lewis. His always forward, peacefully towards the goal with buckets of common sense is awesome. Onward!
May I ask what Lewis book you are reading? I've been reading a lot of political memoirs/autobiographies/thought lately. Waiting for a couple by Stacey Abrams.
It would be really nice if the people all over the world show they care on Jan 20. The bigger the celebration, the better. We could use a little moral support over here and a little less looking on in horror and fear or glee at our failures and ignorance.
Thank you Mr. Prischl, it is good hearing perspectives from outside the US. Heather is truly a gift during these extraordinarily hard times, I too have recently subscribed because I want her to have help keeping the white supremacist tirades away from her work, along with administrative help with the posting process. Nancy, Richmond VA
Welcome, Peter. Some of the best perspectives of Americans strengths and weaknesses have traditionally come from those who straddle it with ties to other countries (e.g. Alexis de Tocqueville). IMO, America's richness is greatly enhanced by its visitors, new arrivals, and diversity.
Moedling and Schoenberg - wonderful! Our house is just one block from his, owned by the Arnold Schönberg Center and used for research, small performances and some museum rooms. Come back
Welcome, Peter. The fact that we are all citizens of the world is often overlooked. Lucky you, living in beautiful Vienna! So nice that lovely Heather brings us together.
Welcome! Yes, we are all in this together. Our words and actions have meaning - oftentimes in ways and places far beyond what we originally intended. Looking forward to the international perspective you can bring to this forum.
Welcome, Peter. Glad you have joined us and found what Heather is doing worth contributing to. We have more than a few in the community from countries outside the US and i enjoy reading their thoughts.
Yes - European and American hate groups nourish each other. We share the challenge of balancing individual rights with group rights, strengthening a democracy that supports freedom of all while prohibiting actions that take away the safety and rights of others. Even freedom of speech draws the line at shouting a false cry of "Fire!" that might cause lethal panic.
There are additional sides of this. Listen to Jenna Ryan after her arrest in connection with the insurrection in the capitol on January 6:
“I don’t feel a sense of shame or guilty from my heart. I feel like I was basically following my president. I was following what we were called to do. He asked us to fly there. He asked us to be there. So I was doing what he asked us to do,” Ryan said. “I do feel a little wronged in this situation because I’m a real estate agent and this has taken my company. This has taken my business. I am being slandered all over the internet, all over the world and all over the news and I’m just like a normal person.”
Somebody else, speaking in 1960 after their arrest in connection with World War 2:
“To sum it all up, I must say that I regret nothing. My heart was light and joyful in my work, because the decisions were not mine. Obeying an order was the most important thing to me. It could be that is in the nature of the German. I had to watch the madness of destruction, because I was one of the many horses pulling the wagon and couldn't escape left or right because of the will of the driver, I now feel called upon and have the desire to tell what happened. I was never an anti-Semite. … My sensitive nature revolted at the sight of corpses and blood... I personally had nothing to do with this. My job was to observe and report on it. I am certain, however, that those responsible for the murder of millions of Germans will never be brought to justice.”
(Of course the somebody else is Adolf Eichmann. This is an assemblage of quotes from comments he made over several years. I'm not saying the crimes of the insurrectionists in general, or Ryan in particular, are similar to Eichmann. But the mindset is frighteningly similar.)
I am not sure Trump will pardon Ryan or others from January 6 who are all saying in essence “I was invited to the Capital by the President”, given his own defense is that he didn’t say anything that incited the insurrection. Like so many others, these folks may be about to discover that Trump’s self-interest outweighs any sense of responsibility to people who have followed.
I guess tRump could be stupid enough to grant pardons to some of these thugs, but it seems to me that if he does he admits he incited them in some way. Wouldn't look good at his impeachment trial as the pardons could be used against him.
Pardons are coming. Knowing Trump, he’ll announce a large list of pardons on Wednesday morning right before the inauguration, just to draw attention away from Biden. I hope the media doesn’t take the bait.
It seems to me any pardon(s) by Trump will open a constitutional can of worms.
Legal/Constitutional questions; (My own)
-Is a person eligable for a presidential pardon prior to being convicted or even indicted? Can that pardon be "post-dated" beyond the president's term in office? -Does an impeached but not yet tried in the Senate president retain the power to pardon anybody?
-Can an an impeached but not yet tried in the Senate president pardon a person prior to (or even after) that person's conviction, if that person's aledged criminal behavior was directly involved in the actions that got the president impeached?
-Can an impeached etc. president, prior to any trial, pardon himself, and is that not, per se, a confession of guilt?
The pardon power reads "except in cases of Impeachment." That has been taken to mean it cannot be used to undo an impeachment. I would argue - for what it's worth, as I'm not a lawyer - that it also means that a president impeached for an offense cannot pardon others involved in the same offense.
And, let’s hope that sharp lawyers will argue that everyone he is planning to pardon is involved in the same charges as what is in the articles of impeachment. The presidential pardon was never intended to be used by a corrupt president (who incited a violent overthrow of the government!) to a “get out of jail free” for himself and those who were complicit. Not that we would ever expect anything different, but trump has not even gone through the appropriate pardon process We need some pit bull lawyers to step up to the plate and not let this go!
An impeachment is analogous to an indictment, and we still believe someone is innocent until proven guilty. The answer to all your questions, I think, is yes, except maybe the post-dated one. The pardon power is pretty broad. Self-pardon is another question. And that one would have to be tried by the courts, and I think we all think it will be, unless Trump resigns and Pence pardons him.
It's more analogous to a negative job evaluation. It's not a criminal justice proceeding. No one goes to jail or pays a fine. (Hopefully, with Trump, that comes after he's been axed.) When you come right down to the constitutional legalities as I understand them, all you really need to fire the President are the votes in the House and Senate.
But I think your argument is the correct one; an impeached president retains all powers and responsibilities until a conviction in the Senate makes him no longer the President.
To me, these 2 people who feel no guilt are examples of shirking the responsibility of thinking about your own actions and doing the right thing regardless of what the “herd” does or they are told to do by another. To me, these people exhibit a “lemming” mentality.
Following orders is no excuse. Ryan still made a choice to act on her perception of what she heard. OtherS heard those same words, and chose not to "storm the Capitol".
Very similar indeed! I remember Eichmann’s trial vividly, watching it on my parents tv, in black and white. I was young but it always stuck in my head. I agree with your summary.
They have been radicalized and still don’t understand. They will live the rest of their lives this way. Broken humans unable to contribute anything positive or rational to their national debate.
What I find most upsetting is the collective American weak mindedness that allowed a sociopathic grifter to not only win the presidency, but to turn the entire country upside down with little if any real resistance from the citizenry and more importantly, the people we elect and trust to protect the country.
It seems that many individuals experiencing economic woes and listening to evasive politicians became desperate for some good news. Then a messenger appeared, one they saw as caring about their needs. They were hoping for rescue and ready to believe. Trump has a talent for lying, and his lies worked on these very stressed individuals.
That's my take on this sad situation in our country.
Ralph makes and important point: "many individuals experienced economic woes..." I don't believe either party was addressing the economic issues that affected ordinary Americans. I think the Dems (and the traditional Repubs as well) failed miserably to respond to the issues of struggling Americans, or even explain why government is of value. But the non-traditional, circus show, appealed crudely to those concerns and won the election of 2016. If the country can ever be returned to its "norms" it seems essential that the needs of working people must be vigorously addressed. Corporate money-lords and wealthy donors have controlled which political issues are addressed and they do not care about workers. They care about profits. To imagine that it took 20 years to even have a $15 an hour federal wage PROPOSED by a President is a good indicator of how one-sided our politics have been and why so many don't trust the government to do the very thing that allows ordinary people to thrive.
And even if the Biden/Harris administration is able to shepherd the $15/hr federal minimum through both houses, $15/hr is no longer a living wage in many parts of the country. Let's say take-home at that wage is about $1900/mo. In my small city, it's hard to find even a studio apartment for under $1,000. That leaves $900 for food, transportation, clothing, health care, utilities. A single person might be able to do it, but anyone with children can't. Certainly, it isn't possible to save at that rate.
Do you think that people with economic woes really have the kind of money to pay for gas to travel, to buy little hats and flags that say trump on them? I don’t think so. I don’t think these people are desperate economically I think they’ve been deceived. Honestly I think these people are greedy for attention, uneducated. People looking for an exciting party! Something that gives them an identity. Yes, this is a gross generalization not all of these people are this way. There are educated people. People that believe they are Christians. It is this group I don’t understand.
How could CT not see the light? Reading about Jackie Robinson 1964 is really something courageous. Robinson had the voice of Rockefeller & Nixon, but learned to despise Goldwater's divisive game plan.
People in my state are taking screen shots on those who posted on SM travelling to DC, Staying at the DT Hotel, and sending to the FBI. Reminds me of the Oligarchs and European princes at the Battel of Bull Run.
His showmanship continues to delude his followers. It is an essential power of a cult leader to continually mesmerize his followers with the beauty of "the future" he will provide. It is just ahead! For Trump, if it hadn't been for "those losers," he could have accomplished so much more, "and if re-elected, I will."
Like followers in an end-of-the-world cult. No matter how many times the Great Leader's forecast fails, they are still ready to jump on the next end-is-nigh prediction.
Interesting...My college-age son says that one reason people like the Republigcan message is because it is more positive (We're great, we're the best, we're gonna be greater) while the Democrat message is negative (We have a lot of problems we need to fix, fix, fix).
Good point. One side with its head in the ground as the stampede approaches denying the oncoming charge; the other shouting "look out!" but is perceived as "negative." I wonder how the deniers run their homes, families, businesses?
Just loaded the dryer and wondered if BOTH sides want to "fix" things but they want to fix very different things. And each side considers the other side "negative." Laundry thoughts. 😊
Right, they are more positive about our own country and more negative about everyone else. On the other hand they always seem to be in critique mode, never in a "that's good" kind of mood.
The Republicans I know who are financially stable (and white Christians) are strongly military and executives. They don't know any life other than "I give orders. I follow nobody. I've been trained to do this." I fear there is now way to reach these types. And they personify the happiest people on earth.
You can wrap your head around it when you understand that it’s all about race and has been from the beginning. Only 0.1% of the electorate is concerned about “redistribution of wealth” (as the obscenely wealthy call it). That doesn’t affect elections. What most white people are concerned about, now, in FDR’s time, in Eisenhower’s time, and in all periods of American history, is fair treatment of black people. They are against it. Sixty percent of white people oppose fair treatment of black people. At all levels and in all domains. Economic, judicial, and social. When you understand that, you can wrap your head around American politics.
You are absolutely right, Rex, about the foundational effects of pervasive racism on people's political and social views. But don't overlook the abilities of the 0.1% to use allegations about economic "unfairness"--makers v. takers, welfare cheats, etc.--to draw support for what ends up being redistribution of wealth upwards.
Yes, you’re right, Tom. The wealthy don’t have the votes themselves but have outsized influence, the tax system is regressive, and the entire economy overwhelmingly favors the already wealthy. About the only optimism I can offer is that the 60% of white people who favor oppression of Americans with non-European ancestors was 80% in the 1950s and 90% before that, but it doesn’t matter which direction it goes from here because by 2040 (if we get that far), the rest if us will be able to easily outvote them.
I don't know how you do it, Heather. Almost every day, a balanced, thoroughly informed, beautifully written, incisive analysis of the working out of history in some sphere of the US. This time it is the evolution of "thought" up to the point of claims that "the federal government must turn over all public lands to the states to open them to private development" by a series of unhinged, bigoted, desperately selfish men (they were all men) from Rush Limbaugh and before, to Bundy, and now the loons who rushed the Capitol. And now want to be pardoned.
Your lesson for today is so important, and the world may be in a state to listen to it, put so luminously. I guess there is space to think about the Fairness Doctrine again, this time in the guise of a Federal Communications Commission (or whoever) for regulation of communication platforms and the enforcement of editorial accountability.
Reading your words from afar (the UK) there is one aspect of the history that you unfold that seems to be understated. In Europe - in our crowded countries - we have always given weight to the contribution of community to problems and to their solutions. In the wide-open spaces of America, you have always elevated the status of the single man fighting alone for his family, and downplayed, even disparaged, the role of collective solutions.
To me, the lot of them - Weaver, Koresh, McVeigh, Bundy (Cliven and Ammon) - all stand in the tradition of John Wayne and High Noon. They would say "proud tradition". I would say - dangerous. They would say "patriotic". I would say - undermining the nation by elevating private greed.
Of that lot, Koresh is, maybe, a different case. The role of cult psychology in a nation that fed on camp meetings and exclusive group self-identification is another story you should tell one day, and I recommend one of my compatriots to you: Fanny Trollope, Anthony's mother, The Domestic Manners of the Americans, 1832.
In both of her books I have read—The History of the Republican Party and How the South Won the Civil War—Heather spends much time framing America’s cowboy image, one Reagan used to great advantage during his campaigns. She does this especially in the latter, which is her most recent. If you haven’t read them, I can’t recommend them highly enough. I also have her book Wounded Knee; it’s in my queue. (Incidentally, the great James Baldwin also wrote about the myth of America, which included—among many things—these cowboy western films and images.)
Really enjoying how the south won...I didn’t know it was Buckley who birthed the advice, Republicans should give up on reasoned debate and should have a strategy appealing to passions and emotions.
Ultra-individualism – the notion that each human being is a discrete, totally autonomous entity -- is a poisonous absurdity, one which when used as it has been in America and too many other countries, transforms citizens into free radicals infesting the body social and politic. It is commonly accompanied by the equally spurious idea (one also held by otherwise intelligent Inquisitors, frightened of their helpless prisoners) that by destroying the bodies of “bad” individuals, you destroy what they stand for. This doesn’t wipe out evil, it perpetuates it.
Think back to 1945. Those of us who grew up in postwar Europe did not expect any form of Nazism to arise from the ashes; but the evil that men did lived on, not always underground, in an endless chain reaction. It still lives, befouling all it touches: the innocent, the unborn, the miraculous planet we live on.
History is not dead people, dead ideas, in a dead past. The past is all too present. In us. Among us.
"the evil that men did lives on" . . . unless active, intelligent steps are taken to break the cycle. And even then, it is one step forward and likely another step back later. Look at the legacy of Mandela's magic of reconciliation in South Africa. But, I am still convinced that the overall direction can be forward. Have you come across a book by the Dutch Historian Rutger Bregman, "Humankind"? Well worth reading, and optimistic. Also this interview with Bregman will amuse you:
Thank you Bob for your perspective from the UK, I appreciate it. Your first paragraph stays with me —- it is mostly selfish white men who want to turn our democracy into oligarchy. I see a few women and a couple Black men in the videos from Jan 6, but overwhelmingly it is white men. I agree the attraction is greed, especially for those more well off, but also perhaps they are attracted to physical fighting? More so than women in general?
I watched the first few episodes, but the whole big rich rancher doing his thing AND the tendency to get kind of soap-opera-drama-like just turned me off. I'm done with the whole cowboy image thing taking over the land - now public land - and cows everywhere. Could be it didnt continue in that vein - I've always like Kevin Costner, but I'm done.
This is a helpful and long overdue clarification of "socialism," a term loosely bandied about by so many but understood by so few. Its use seems especially rampant by people whose only point of reference are the old communist models of Russia and China.
I think part HCR's comment isn't exactly correct. As a social theory, socialism posits that a collective cooperation of citizens will make all governmental institutions public. Yet as practiced in Denmark, Sweden, or India for example, private ownership exists in tandem with an emphasis on individual liberties, and collective cooperation is manifested in accessible and "free" health care, education, family leave, as well as those things that also exist in the US - public highways, libraries, and police and fire services, to name a few.
What's not so "free" is that income taxes are typically higher but they are offset, in part, by lower out of pocket expenses than we have here.
While both Socialism and Communism utilize some version of centralized planning, communism is the model where "property and economic resources are owned and controlled by the state (rather than individual citizens)."
HCR's conclusion, however, is accurate whether living in a capitalist or socialist state - popular public policies which cost tax dollars and supported through progressive tax systems, where wealthier people have to help pay for programs that would everyone - is what chaps the asses of not only the 1% but of politicians who cater to those not particularly interested in the welfare of others so long as "they got theirs."
What we fail to realize is that "the efficiencies of the market" are designed to optimize profit when demand opportunities exist, but assume that 1) everyone has the means to purchase or not purchase as they like, or 2) if they don't have the means, that's their problem. In biblical terms, capitalism is equivalent to "I'm not my brother's keeper."
Look, I'd love to optimize my own life choices whenever and wherever possible. At one time I could. Cancer took away several years of "economic opportunity" from me and now it's harder to do so. Cancer wasn't my "fault" nor was the inability to work for some time. I'm not asking for anything free, but when the GOP was hot on "repeal and replace" of the ACA, in realized that circumstances had changed. When my carrier increased premiums from about $1200/month to $5000/month at the end of the year while I was still in treatment, it was clear I no longer fit the capitalist assumption that everyone can afford to choose or not. I couldn't afford at that point. And despite a diagnosis of "incurable Stage 4 cancer," I saw many people in far worse shape than I. Yet few of the people I know who grouse about socialism would've said "too bad, I guess you'll just have to die."
To me, that's the difference. No one should have to choose between bankruptcy and death, or unemployment vs building skills, or not having access to safety and security services like police and firemen.
If we're so scared of socialism then we cannot allow every industry to operate under a "maximize profits" model. Health care, education, pharmaceutical development, as examples, should be limited to a cost plus model. The government can and should help fund research and basic training and basic health services. Oh, by the way, that's consistent with a democratic socialist model but don't tell anybody.
I am sorry about your health issues, Scott. Your points are an interesting perspective.
I would like to take a stab at this as I have been spouting at trump supporters for 5 years about our socialist democracy to try to help them understand that if they are using a gazillion systems in our society that make our lives easier, safe and healthier for all, they are benefactors of a socialist democracy. It is hardly a dirty word. Whether you are rich or poor or in-between, we all benefit from our particular socialist democracy (which includes capitalism). That may be the rub? We are a beautiful conglomeration of the the peoples of the world, Under One Government. We are also an imperfect operational conglomeration that does not fit "socialist," "communist" or purely "capitalist. This appears difficult to explain to people who use one-word simplifications, on purpose or out of ignorance, because is it easy, useful propaganda, or they have not thought through all the facts. It is possible I am totally off-base. If I am not, then it is crucial that we educate the masses using Facts, thus we must have the Fairness Doctrine back as part of righting this ship. Words and truth are critical in a democracy.
Seems to me the intentions of those who appear to control everything want to maintain a racial caste system and have no interest in their brothers' and sisters' well-being.
Anand Giraharadas, https://the.ink/p/hope has written a great article describing what I have been referring to as "the death screams of the dying patriarchy." He shifts that perspective to what we are witnessing is the mourning or grieving of our white supremacist terrorists. They are mourning their place in the world as we become a more equality-based country. That little shift in perception has helped me to suddenly feel compassion for them in their fear and grief of no longer being superior—just because the color of their skins. We are witnessing their stage of anger. This is a Bingo! moment for me. A palpable sudden shift in my view of them. My compassion for them. (Psst! I may secretly love my hate for their despicable behaviors...so I have to marinate in this new perspective for awhile).
In our Heathersherd group, we were asked to come up with the most important things we could do to enable change right now. There was discussion of being able to talk with trump supporters who do not think like us. I have tried for five years, and, until I read Anand's article last night, I could not even IMAGINE wasting my time with the "cult." To me, white supremacy, nazism, proud boys, q-anon... are all impossible to have rational conversations with, a total waste of time, and are behaving like anti-Americans anti-Constitutionalists. I still think that, but I am suddenly more open to seeing them as sad, sad people fighting and mourning imaginary threats of their way of life. Look behind who has really riled them up...BIG MONEY. That Dark Money is all about power and control. America is actually moving forward and the mourners will not be able to stop the changes a'coming. There are many more of us in colorful forces ratcheting forward and We are the Source of money via our buying power. We need to choose wisely whilst we create this new world: "We the People — ALL of us this time." This includes all those grieving white, angry people. All of us. We need to help them understand that we can all prosper....equally, if given the chance. There is nothing to be afraid of with that vision. They are living in fear anyway. Maybe, let's try something different.
Media, books, films, art are such powerful tools. I believe we MUST utilize those tools, rapidly, so our masses are educated in school and outside of school. The dark films that are so rampant might need new films that are shifts in consciousness and creativity The broadway musical, Hamilton, is a great example of consciousness raising of our people via music, dance and seeing all colors of people as prominent thinkers. I know teens who are reading Chernow's 818 page, book on Hamilton's biography after seeing the broadway show. They are excited and pumped up to learning about America! Lin Manuel Miranda is a historical genius in what he has brought forth during this second, most critical period of America's development and vision. Have I reached 818 pages in this missive, yet?
BTW - I've seen folks blocked by paywalls. I'd like to suggest to the group that your library should have lots of paywall news sources available free - just by signing up with your local library card. Mine allows me access to major magazines and newspapers. Cheers!
Oh, I just wrote a long response to you about the caste system and then it disappeared. Thanks for the article, and let's just say that I totally agree that we have a caste system here...and we all know what color is still at the top! Unfortunately, what many of us are striving for is all colors meeting together, in the middle and thriving by sharing with one another.
Penelope, after I responded to your comment I came across this article in my mail. It speaks to some of the issues I was trying to describe, but not as well as this author does.
That was interesting. I think the media/social media have a lot of responsibility for the rise of DTJ. He is a celebrity/drama queen and sucks the air out of most situations so he is good for selling papers, shocking headlines and operating his so-called "presidency" and misinformation via late-night manic tweets.
I agree-- our internet media/social media has made the world much more complex and subject to soundbites and info that does not allow for much in-depth thinking.
And then add the trolls, bots, phishing, and targeted propaganda. In many ways we are able to connect and share information around the world immediately and in other ways, it is a pox on humanity. And then there are forums like this one where people can respectfully hash out our thoughts, hear interesting viewpoints, ideas and experiences and continue to grow and learn from the host and one another.
Penelope, one of the reasons I like this forum is the thoughtful exchanges that occur. (OTOH, too many commenters begin with some HCR worship. Don't get me wrong - she's fascinating and helps us all through interpretation and provision of historical context. But that's why we're here and we don't need to bow or curtsy before posting!)
In any case, the notion of "class mourning" is an interesting take, and it makes sense if we extrapolate individual emotions to society as a whole. However, going to your point about education, we try to teach kids that you "can't always get what you want" and that we can accomplish more by working together. These are tough lessons and it seems as if they're frequently forgotten as people get older. But while I'd have patience dealing with an individual who was mourning, I have no patience for a collective that, in its death throes, pursues a scorched earth strategy rather than seeking ways to adapt to new circumstances.
I think you're right - education about history and social models and community dynamics is critical, but my sense is that a larger issue is how 24/7 technology has backfired. The internet's promise of global interconnectedness has created an almost Pavlovian need for new information AND for validation of one's ideas. This reduces patience and lends itself to simplification or shorthand representations of complex ideas.
Who wants to go through a point by point comparison between capitalism, socialism, and communism when they can just say "socialism is bad?" Who wants to think about how elements of social models may cross over into other models? So technology and social media platforms enable you to connect with almost anybody as well as only with those who think like you do. 24/7 access also forces media sources to try come up with something new every hour. In practical terms that message saying the same thing in different ways or to add opinion or speculation in order to offer a "twist" that differentiates one source from another.
So you're not off base when you say "it appears difficult to explain to people who use one-word simplifications, on purpose or out of ignorance, because is it easy, useful propaganda, or they have not thought through all the facts." it's just like the entire GOP picking up the term "radical leftist agenda" of the Democrats. Even Bernie Sanders is not a radical leftist. I personally think Elizabeth Warren was the smartest candidate out there, I'm part because she not only spoke about topics but she documented them and she developed plans to show hoped she'd propose implementing those plans. Just because every industrialized nation has some form of universal health care doesn't mean it's wrong or radical, though that's what the GOP would have you believe.
Long story short (too late, I know), but yes, we must help educate people about "facts" but we cannot afford to slow our efforts to undo the damage that Trump has wrought and to address the critical issues of the pandemic and the economy and political polarization and becoming re-engaged with the world at large. We're not moving backwards to accommodate the feelings of one group that doesn't want to play ball.
Sorry for the rant, but thanks for your great reply.
Hi Scott, I just want to reply to your response to my response and then I will look at the link you just sent. I totally do not agree or condone in any way with the scorched earth policy behaviors of these dying patriarchal thugs. I can have compassion for the reason they are upset. Every single person who has committed sedition needs to pay the consequences. Grief is not a get out of jail free card. As I stated somewhere else today: Sedition. Felony. Twenty years.
I may be compassionate, but I do have strong boundaries and high expectations for human behaviors that go beyond the pale. I feel the same about T**p and all his cronies. None of them are above the law. Sedition is sedition, and attempting to overthrow our election is simply sedition. They should be charged accordingly.
(Additionally, every one of them owes our country reparations).
Yes Scott: Democratic Socialism (which is the system in Europe put into place by most of the western European countries sometime between 1945 and 1980) presupposes that humanity is better off if everyone is able to achieve the Four Freedoms FDR talked about (Ironically, on 6 January 1941): Freedom from Fear, Freedom from Want, Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Worship. The Freedoms from Want and from Fear are the issues we are really struggling with and have always done. What is different in Europe is that for the most part, parliamentary systems actually DO represent constituencies because they are based mostly on proportional representation, Center-Right parties (with some grumbling, admittedly) DO embrace--after decades of opposition and attempted privatization--principles like universal healthcare, a livable minimum wage, and affordable housing. But here is the problem: in Scandinavia, especially, where these systems work exceptionally well, with only the occasional hiccup (such as Sweden deciding to go for the "herd immunity" option re: COVID-19, which resulted in thousands of preventable deaths), the culture is quite monolithic. The number of non-white northern Scandinavians is extremely small. When refugees began to be welcomed into the system--especially from Turkey, Greece, Syria, Afghanistan, and Somalia--the Right began to try to legislate against their inclusion into the social safety net all "native" (read white Germanic) Swedes, Norse, and Danes enjoy. Racism is just below the surface. Sexism is not as big a deal, apparently, but I have colleagues in Norway who tell me that it is alive and well--also under the surface.
In order for the USA to adopt Democratic Socialist ideals (AOC advocates for this, and of course Bernie) there has to be a broad consensus that everyone has an equal right to freedom from want. That is unlikely to occur because of the racist embrace of American Exceptionalism that occurs not only on the Right but also on the Left.
The word for the politics that have had so much influence in Scandinavia (albeit less nowadays) is Social Democracy.
But almost all developed countries -- except the United States -- have healthcare systems that provide citizens with a safety net in case of illness which, as we have been seeing, is no respecter of beliefs or class distinctions. Or of Cain's response when God asked him where his brother was...
That said, you use that word Socialism (dirty to ultra-individualist American ears) too freely. Is Canada socialist? Is Switzerland socialist? Is Japan socialist?
Yes! Social Democracies is a term I feel might be accepted by Americans, over time. In contrast to Social Democracies, we have 'Private Greed’ of American capitalism.
As Lakoff remains us, "say what you mean, and mean what you say”, over and over again. The benefits of universal health care in a Social Democracy far outweighs the pain, poverty and suffering from the Private Greed of our profiteering health care system
Gotta take "social" out. Capitalistic Democracy? Isn't that our grand experiment? Democracy will cover workers and their families' education and healthcare, along with infrastructure, and environmental management (trying not to sound threatening to CEOs), freeing up business to focus on business.
Yes, I remember my affinity for Demorcatic Capitalism. We will have many people disagree with us, and so that is to be expected if we are say anything meaningful
Thank you for your clarification. I am a democratic socialist in my understandings, and in my support of messengers like AOC and Bernie Sanders-who has delivered a consistent message since the 60’s. It took me a lifetime, but I’m so far to the left now, I can no longer see the center. Here’s hoping the best for you. 🤞🏻❤️🤍💙
Unfortunately, Bernie did not get out ahead of the term ‘democratic socialist’. So, the term and his values got defined for him. He ought to have ALWAYS described the benefits of a European capitalism with its universal safety net, with specific examples of the taxes people paid, and how they benefited with little debt by individuals and families.
“What we fail to realize is that "the efficiencies of the market" are designed to optimize profit when demand opportunities exist, but assume that 1) everyone has the means to purchase or not purchase as they like, or 2) if they don't have the means, that's their problem.”
Then we have the “essential” workers who are not paid a living wage.
So interesting and alarming that the families with bootstraps refuse to enable those without so that they may pull themselves up as well. The predation of the rich living off the labors of the poor. To me, it’s always about the distribution of wealth. always. And sadly.
Wishing you well, dear sir. May you find bright moments. You have given one to me today.
One tool for deep gardening to get a measure of control over the deep roots of right wing terrorism is reinstatement of a Fairness Doctrine that includes social media. Anyone know of an updated version of HR 4401?
Just a point or two. The Fairness Doctrine applied to over-the-air broadcasting, but not to cable TV networks like CNN or Fox News or OANN. And not to the Internet. And, less important these days, to print media. So reinstating it would not affect them at all.
But it might affect some public radio and TV stations, forcing them to broadcast non-factual counter opinions.
And, would you want an FCC run by a right-wing authoritarian to make decisions about the content distributed over any and all recognizable channels?
I have not heard of a carefully-thought-out replacement.
“The report by the Congressional Research Service notes that broadcast is ‘distinct from cable, satellite, and the Internet, which are all services for which consumers must pay. It does not appear that the Fairness Doctrine may be applied constitutionally to cable or satellite service providers,’ it continues.”
Can someone spell out the constitutional distinction between public versus paid media?
I read recently that the Fairness Doctrine was based on the now-obsolete limitation on the number of airwave channels then available for broadcasting, the reasoning being that since each viewpoint was unable to have its own channel, all the channels must represent each viewpoint. That the broadcasts must be "factual" was an added bonus, possibly included to cut down on the proliferation of viewpoints.
Now, when each person can potentially have their own individualized info feed, the rationale for the Fairness Doctrine is overtaken by technological advance. Frankly, I'm not sure how it would apply to such a distributed network such as the internet anyway. Sad, because we don't seem to be doing a good job, as a society, of maintaining anything resembling informational hygiene.
A key component of the fairness doctrine was to give equal time to opinion. Today, many can no longer distinguish fact, speculation, or opinion...so it’s all interpreted to be facts, which leads to RFDP.
We have warnings on cigarettes and alcohol “if ur pregnant...”, and carcinogen warnings. It’s not that hard to re imagine the fairness doctrine applied to all media consumption as well is it?
I believe the key distinction lies in the fact that we the public "own" the airwaves just like we own those grazing lands leased to ranchers, and therefore we have the right to ask for rent (grazing fees) from them or insist (in case of airwaves) that they not be used for purposes inimical to the public wellbeing.
We need to get our collective heads together, to figure out what a Fairness Doctrine would look like on modern technology - cable stations, social media, etc - and how to base it legally so that the result is in fact fairness not a tool for propaganda.
We need to write/call our Congress people, regardless of who they are, to advance our views. This can be done even before there are clear ideas on how to proceed, especially if sympathetic congress people will help figure out how to do it. There might actually be a right-left coalition that could be built on this one, but the devil is in the details - we want real fairness, not more lies.
If our Congress people seem hopeless, find someone to run against them who understands the value of what we are proposing.
Once we have some clear ideas, we could form an organized advocacy group to promote them.
In a separate thread, HCR reader Kimberly Kennedy posted that the Washington Post settled a $250 million lawsuit by the student portrayed as verbally berating an Omaha tribal elder, in absence of a bigger context.
Yep, Dems create a government bureau to judge the factual basis of news and commentary, and then the Republicans win some elections, and crush opposing ideas.
If we have a government bureau deciding factual basis, that is what I meant by a vehicle for propaganda that we don't want. The original Fairness Doctrine worked very well, under both Republican and Democratic administrations. The Republicans canned it while Reagan was president, which cleared the way for wild unchallenged falsehoods on Fox News and the current problems where massive lying about the election is now believed by the majority of Republicans because they have never heard anything else, and a significant number of people assaulted the Capitol based, at least in part, on those beliefs.
1. I don't believe Fox News was ever hampered by the Fairness Doctrine, because Fox News was always a cable and satellite channel--never an over-the-air broadcast station. Think AM and FM radio, and TV channels coming in to TV sets over rabbit ears, or rooftop antennas.
2. A counterexample: "Pravda" means "Truth" in Russian. And, Pravda was the official house organ (mouthpiece) of the government of the Soviet Union.
"As the names of the main Communist newspaper and the main Soviet newspaper, Pravda and Izvestia, meant "the truth" and "the news" respectively, a popular saying was "there's no truth in Pravda and no news in Izvestia".[22] However, though not highly appreciated as an objective and unbiased news source, Pravda was regarded – both by Soviet citizens and by the outside world – as a government mouthpiece and therefore a reliable reflection of the Soviet government's positions on various issues. The publication of an article in Pravda could be taken as indication of a change in Soviet policy or the result of a power struggle in the Soviet leadership, and Western Sovietologists were regularly reading Pravda and paying attention to the most minute details and nuances."
The UK has Ofcom, a licensing bureau that requires news be factual. Though the BBC is far from perfect and has been pushed into contorted shapes since the advent of Brexit-based discourse toxicity, it remains more reliable than nearly anything available in the US.
All right. Do you think the use of social media to flood the country with lies is just fine and dandy? If not, do you like the default condition of it being up to media CEO's to decide what is acceptable? They coddled trump's dangerous lies for a long time, only stopping after the assault on the Capitol. If you think some kind of updated Fairness Doctrine - which worked quite well in its day - is impossible to achieve in a good way, what do you think is the best way to pull this country out of its divided silos?
Both cable news and social media, along with their virtues, have been instruments of pushing this country into extreme ideas and political tribalism. It's a real problem. The point of updating the Fairness Doctrine would be to address that. Do you have some other ideas on how to do it?
The assumption that there is only one opposing viewpoint to any broadcast or piece of published information is misleading. I was on the debate team in high school. Each year there was a single proposition to be debated in the entire league. Debate teams did not find out whether they would debate the positive or the negative in a round of debating until five minutes before the round began. Consequently each team prepared a case supporting the affirmative as well as several cases for the negative, each of these exploring a different point of view on the proposition and offering a different alternative in place of it.
Thank you. It’s useful too have something concrete. Perhaps the herd, or some members thereof, can get organized around this and press their representatives to get this rule reinstated.
OK, go ahead. Re-regulate over-the-air broadcasters. Won't affect Fox News or OANN or any of many, many Internet outlets. And it might force public radio or PBS to broadcast right-wing talking points, keeping us mindful of some disastrous ideas.
A consummation devoutly to be wished. But Very Complicated, especially given that there's money to be made in "customer engagement" -- keeping eyeballs and minds connected to your brand so that you can sell advertising -- and personal data -- at higher rates.
Nowadays my information "fix" has to do with checking Twitter -- I have carefully selected who I follow -- as well as many of the more-respected national and local newspapers. And The Bulwark, and Axios, and on and on. Lucky thing I'm retired. <grin>
The problem of trumpers violence based on disinformation is clearly escalating, and their information “fix” is consuming disinformation sources like Fox News & Entertainment and QAnon—exclusively, and for some, all day long. We know the more a falsehood is repeated, the more likely it is to be believed. So thinking out loud, drying up the source of their “drug” would be the intention of a new Fairness Doctrine.
But addressing the problem of drug and alcohol addiction has shifted from prohibition to prevention through consumer education. Food for thought.
In part, I hope that "deplatforming" their views will slow the spread of falsehoods. The other part, of course, is that they will seek other, clandestine, avenues of spreading misinformation.
My hope is that good people (there are plenty of us left, alive and kicking) will continue to find and "out" these clandestine networks. I think of the Twitter account @Parlertakes -- still active after Parler itself has been taken down.
We get your point, Bob. Many of us just wish for a way to have a common base of fact and we at least look for ways to get there. And we need to remember unintended consequences of our dreams.
I fear that the right-wingers don't want a common basis in fact. Facts are hard. Unyielding, and tricky. (Example: The days get shorter in November, but due to some oddity in the universe, sunrise is earlier for a time.) It's much more comfortable to believe that you have a More True (if unverifiable) Grasp of "Reality." That you and yours are "smarter than the average bear." That you have special knowledge. Unassailable Verities.
Contempt for others is an easy feeling. Makes people feel superior.
And, getting down to brass tacks and actually striving with someone (a Quaker term, there) to come to a common understanding can take hours, days, weeks, or longer. (Quakers seek guidance from a higher power to do this)
Thanks for your link! I’m wondering if HCR may help to lead a charge? I know that other members of this community have expressed interest in moving some version of the Fairness Doctrine forward.
Including the social media would, i would think, necessarily include making them responsible for their content. You thereby open them up for prosecution should the content break the law as well as imposing "fairness" on them. To "be faire" they would need to respond to comments presenting different points of view and denounce "fake facts". Interesting.
The social media would fade out of existence as public forums and force them to change their business model. Not a bad thing!
First thing I do every morning is read HCR’s newsletter on my iPhone. Yet for the first time I noticed a heart at the top so I thought I would “like” this one, surely the best, most historically thorough summation of the right wing movement I’ve read, and for the first time discovered the comments. I usually avoid comment sections since eventually trolls create conflict and debase the conversation, but what a heartening conversation I find here. Thank you for your insightful comments and calm, respectful tone.
Welcome Joy! Yes, among the commenters are many who share their knowledge and perspective in a way that both illuminates Heather’s posts and strengthens the bonds of community in a time of such isolation. I, too, am profoundly grateful for the education and comradeship found here.
You have taken the words right out of my mouth. As I read this morning’s column, all I could think of was what a concise summation this is of the right wing movement. Isn’t it great to have access to a great historian every morning?
I had the same delightful surprise when sampling the comments section, after subscribing. It is the embodiment of what I envisioned for the Internet long ago, a vehicle for constructive exchange of ideas, but never saw until now. Thank you Heather and friends!
ABSOLUTELY! I am going into a medical procedure this month, but after that, I am going to do what I can: start petitions, blog posts, Letters to Editors. I see NO greater issue at this time. Even the Coronavirus is secondary; why? because IT WAS ALSO affected by Fake News.
Thanx again Prof, for the history lesson, much of it spanning my or my parents’ lifetime. I lived thru the prejudice of the “Welfare Cadillac” perception that black ppl on assistance could afford a uselessly expensive ride. No one seemed to notice the GM Executives where those Caddies were made getting inflated salaries plus bonuses far in excess of most workers annual salary.
Fact is, I was raised white, middle class. My Great Depression era parents’ left inner city St. Louis for the ‘burbs. I also attended an integrated high school and learned that black teens were the same as white teens. This continued in my military service where black & white men lived, ate, showered and worked together and I sometimes had a black sergeant supervising me.
Then, in the late ‘60s I turned on, tuned in & dropped out. Me, the white middle class young man now living in rundown inner city apartments with other slackers of both races. Trouble is, we did work for the most part. I never took any government assistance, and aside from the times of travel I worked for minimum wages usually 48 hours a week, saving money for the next trip. Yet, ppl saw me as a lazy Hippie. Profiled by my shoulder length hair and beard as a non-contributing member of society.
But, I was Leftist Working Class American, the same as most of those Right Wing Nuts who tried to overthrow the government last week. The only difference is one of perception; of being able to think critically and weigh Liberty against Responsibility. The ignorant tRump cultists don’t seem to realize that total liberty without a sense of responsibility is anarchy.
I'm a retired 5th and 6th grade public school teacher in California's Central Valley. In the years I was a teacher, 1981-2017, I witnessed a marked decline in the time and support we were allocated for teaching social studies. In 1983, A Nation at Risk ushered in increasing emphasis on standards, high stakes testing, and accountability. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act became No Child Left Behind and then Race to the Top. Standards in reading, language, and math drove our curriculum, and since social studies wasn't tested in every grade, teachers were discouraged, sometimes mandated, by administrators to skip it. At the same time, state-adopted social studies texts (which most teachers didn't find time to use) became more narrowly focused on the glorious rich white founding fathers and the courageous white male explorers and pioneers, etc. I did my best to teach a more balanced and representative social studies anyway through reading and language arts by using my own materials and projects (including research reports and presentations on one Native American tribe per student and another on an historic American woman) but it still greatly concerns me that our public school system doesn't prioritize the teaching and learning of social studies. Is this to some extent deliberate, do you think?
Thank you for your daily letters and twice-weekly talks. I'm learning so much from you, and I'm fascinated and deeply grateful.
Back in 2012 I taught in a Maine High School transitioning to so-called state of the art computer-based grading/curricular programming. Frankenstein-esque in a number of ways, its adoption meant high school students would only need two years of social studies for graduation. Part of the ironically named proficiency-based education movement, it seemed the opposite to me.
I've been suspicious of the for-profit privatization of curricula since the late 70s when school systems dropped the term history and switched to social studies. Texas and the textbook scandals led the way. Now it's Pearson et al.
Have worked hard to avoid complicity in these plans and it has meant near disaster for my financial future. Certified to teach in three states, I would love to return to the classroom post #COVID19. Commitment to broad humanities curricula in a public high school has proved close to impossible to find, though.
I like your timeline leading us from reconstruction to today and the breakdown of the intent behind those who fear “socialism”.
I was also fascinated by your assessment of today’s tRump followers as not being cult members but rather the recipients of PsyOps. That really rings true, as I have felt that we’ve been led into this sharp division we are in today intentionally.
The notion of PsyOps also brings to mind the author of the operation. Who he? The obvious answer would be Vladimir Putin but there doesn't have to be only one answer.
until Wednesday, January 20, 2021 at 12:00:00 noon (Washington DC, District of Columbia)
Thank, Prof. Richardson, For me, this was the most relevant for understanding this time of all your letters. Now the sequel is what we do about it. Bringing back the Fairness Doctrine sounds important. My main fear tonight is the one-party rule coupled with the will to use violence. For me, January 6th was the tip of the iceberg. We are on the U.S. Titanic and one part of the Right Wing Extremist Iceberg has just ripped one of the compartments of our vessel -- the institution of the Congress. The other compartments/institutions have been weakened and could soon follow. The safety net life rafts are too few based on a stupid regulation that based the number of life rafts on the size of the ship rather than the number of passengers like not using science in a pandemic. More life rafts weren't needed because the multiple water-tight compartments meant it was unlikely to sink. The life rafts that did get used were not filled to capacity because they didn't think the mechanism that lowered the rafts into the water would collapse. However, there may be some hope with the U.S. Democracy, the new administration, if there is still time. Too many passengers/citizens are totally unaware of how dangerous a time this is. Gerrymandering, voter suppression are taking us toward one-party rule. We are an oligarchic kleptocracy now; the U.S. Democracy may not get here in time to save so many from a watery grave while the band plays Nearer, My God, to Thee. The insurgents were singing the national anthem to show their patriotism.
Thank you for highlighting the key role that Rush Limbaugh plays in our current dysfunction. That is a point that I have long made. He has helped radicalize millions with his anti-government rhetoric. Without him, there’s no Fox News, no Sean Hannity, no Tucker Carlson, etc., etc. In particular, his mainstreaming of the despicable term “feminazi” has always infuriated me beyond belief. It both demeans the Feminist movement (which is its goal) and at the same time whitewashes the true evil that was the Nazi party.
Many of the current MAGA mob refer to Trump as "my president", as in "mein fuhrer". There is also a lot of references to Trump being "God's choice" and so on.
A purely political leader of the government has been adopted as a spritual leader to whom many have ceded control of their lives, as people did with Jim Jones, David Koresh, and other messianic cult leaders. These people put themselves beyond discussion, debate, reasoning, and compromise; the essential elements of a free, democratic, self-governing society. They habitate a world impervious to doubt. The problem now is that there are millions of them.
I agree with HCR that this has been part of our body politic from the beginning. The Pilgrims didn't here come to escape religeous intolerance, they came to institutionalize it.
On January 21, 2017, tens of millions of peaceful protesters gathered (not one single incidence of violence) and showed tremendous unity. Unfortunately, the pride of that day never stood a chance of raising the level of consciousness of a madman (or his enablers and followers) who had stolen his first election. Our government completely unraveled for the next 4 years. My non profound observation over the decades is that too often violence is the catalyst for change.
Our history of peaceful elections and transfer of power (without military assistance) have been a safe haven. Now, 10’s of thousands of troops (very necessary) occupy D.C. so the 46th president (fairly, legally elected) can take the oath of office without getting killed and to prevent any attempts at another coup. It is heartbreaking but is the reality few actually thought would be seen in modern times.
Maintaining a democracy and rule of law takes work by an educated, informed, and involved electorate. We must not ever forget; never again.
I participated in the Women’s March and several other marches in 2017. Absolute calm, peace and unity. The insurrectionists on January 6 never planned to march peacefully. They went to start a war and over-through the government. What upside down thinking to violently seek to overthrow a democratic election, because you want... a democracy.
Yes, those marches generated a universal sense of calm, peace, and unity. What happened on January 6th is beyond the pale. They were not protesters, they were anarchists and terrorists.
Seditionists. It is a felony. Twenty years.
Yes, thank you! I want this point to continue to be raised and I am so concerned that those involved will just get a slap on the wrist... and we will have failed again to hold accountability. Rule of law must be reinstated.
Yes, Biden's impulse to bring the country together must not override the imperative to punish the insurrectionists, wherever they are: back home or in the halls of Congress.
Absolutely, Pamsy! .....Missed you yesterday!
I and my spouse, along with a close friend and her spouse, have attended several marches together since January 2017 - Women's Marches, Marches for Our Lives, advocacy marches with and for immigrants, and Earth Day marches - in our state's capitol. All were peaceful and well-attended. Those who ended up entering the Capitol Bldg here in Olympia did so with pre-arranged appointments with senators and representatives. No weapons, no injuries, no deaths.
Since the 2020 election armed pro-T**** marchers have clashed with counter-protestors multiple times, with at least one shooting by a T****ster. They stormed the Governor's Residence on January 6. There is a bill up for consideration in this legislative session to outlaw open carrying of firearms to protests, but as of today, it's still legal for these guys to parade the streets of our state capitol fully armed. On top of this unrest, the pandemic, the ongoing BLM protests, the increasing number of unhoused people living in tents close to downtown, it is going to take a long time for our little business district to revive. Every time I drive through downtown, I see another closed and boarded up storefront. As the outgoing POTUS used to be so fond of tweeting, SAD (although I mean it in such a different way).
I don't think there is anything more disheartening and frightening than a bunch of guys roaming the streets carrying what look like assault weapons openingly and brazenly. The only reason to do that is to intimidate and/or actually kill people. Yes, it is very sad.
How about everybody who doesn't have the slightest idea what an "anarchist" is just STOP calling everybody they don't like (or agree with) "anarchists." I've numbered myself an anarchist for about fifty years and I a pretty much on what every subscriber to this blog would consider that of "the angels." It is sloppy, lazy and intellectually vacuous to call everybody you don't like an "anarchist." I thought doing so was more or less from the playbook of the last president. But I guess not.
Am I missing something? Hasn’t anarchy historically always been associated with the left wing? My understanding is that anarchy is about hierarchy and a vision (Murray Bookchin comes to mind) that is very much anti-capitalist. I suppose libertarianism blurs the lines and anarchy might be thought of as a natural endpoint of libertarianism, but without social protections just becomes a power hierarchy where the rich may do as they wish and therefore constrain the freedom of the poor.
Yes, upside down thinking. Like Trump wanting to be reelected when he has no interest in running the country.
I just read back my comment and the one above that prompted it, and I realized that the reason things seem upside down is that I am still thinking in terms of people wanting to do what is right, as responsible people do. But those who attacked the Capitol on January 6 and their leader, Donald Trump, use conventional language to mean something entirely different. For instance, when I say democracy, I mean government by and for all the people; when Trump and his followers use that term, they mean government by and for select groups of people. I have learned recently that this deliberate misuse of terms is part of the psychological technique called gaslighting, which attempts to cause people to doubt their convictions. This is why I've been leaning on the dictionary and various other references a lot lately, including our Constitution. I feel an almost constant need to refer to standards. And when speaking, it seems terribly important to chose words carefully, to speak (or write) with precision, and to call out imprecision when encountered and make those speaking (or writing) define the terms they use.
Becky - I’ve been experiencing the same thing. I have until recently never enjoyed learning any kind of history. After a friend told me about Letters from an American, I became hooked! I have been devouring books about American history, particularly regarding the Civil War, but also books and articles about caste systems, political figures, behavioral psychology, neuroscience, and other topics, learning all I can to understand how we got here and how peoples’ beliefs came to be. The more I learn, the more I feel I am understanding people with opposing beliefs. Are there extremists? Yes. Are there non-extremists who are simply people who believe that their values and beliefs are being challenged? Yes. Bottom line is we are all people and like it or not we are all in this together. And we need to be able to speak and communicate using a common language. Words matter. How communication is framed matters. Civility matters.
I am reminded of how powerfully words can communicate in an instant (read George Lakoff, now I see examples everywhere!). Passed a billboard yesterday for an attorney. Headline: Injury Justice. With just two words this communication is framed to make you feel that if you were injured, you were wronged. And this lawyer is already on your side and will help you get what you deserve because you were clearly wronged by someone else. Truly powerful. Politicians have been using this kind of framing too. Think about that. Words matter. It is as you say (Becky) “it seems terribly important to chose (sic) words carefully.”
Yes words are powerful— interestingly though one of the first things I noticed about DT was his limited vocabulary. It’s like a backward sixth grader. Coming after Obama’s formidable language skills in terms of speaking and writing, what a thud.
Liz, I used to think Trump spoke in simplistic language to appeal to his base and deliberately avoided sophisticated language that was unfamiliar to them. When we discovered he reads almost nothing that doesn’t contain his own name embedded in it and stumbles over somewhat sophisticated words written for him on the TelePrompTer, his true illiteracy was revealed. “Think before you speak. Read before you think.” -Fran Lebowitz
That shocked me too, and it took me a while to realize that he doesn't give a rat's ass for me or people like me who try hard to paint clear ideas with words. But he does care for the kind of people who resent the kind of people who try hard to paint clear ideas with words, so he does just the opposite.
I often thought Obama was too good. I LOVE him, but if a newspaper should be written at a 5th grade level, then, when speaking to the public, our leaders should - without condescension - also communicate at that level.
Lena - I too have become fascinated with history thanks to Letters From An American. I also see that we ignore history to our peril. I wish I could agree that we are all in this together. Yes, civility matters, understanding the power of language matters. But it also matters to face the fact, as Richardson writes, that racism is deeply embedded in what may appear to be our most innocent beliefs - as in the white American brand of anti-socialist "liberty". Recent neuroscience research confirms that we all have the same physical brain but we can develop vastly different mind sets. I no longer know how to use language, civility, logic to bridge that gap. It's beyond me. Perhaps this almost coup will begin our long, slow awakening so that we, as a nation, may finally face our dark history.
Becky and Lena - Your comments reveal how important the teacher is in inspiring the student. If the teacher is fascinated by the topic, her students are likely to be also.
Though many of us are older than our professor, HCR, we are definitely her students. These discussions remind me of the better seminars in grad school. I would have stayed at university forever if it had been possible, but this forum keeps my mind from getting dull and fuzzed over with moss.
Yes, excellent advice. Read George Lakoff -- if you don't want to be framed...
If you really get down to the implications of his writing, that could be a liberating experience. Amost alll westerners, especially Americans, are self-incarcerated prisoners locked into their mental habits, concepts, blind beliefs, prejudices. Even the very word Liberty gets hammered into the bars of a mental prison -- for those whose cells still have windows.
"Liberty and justice for all” can be a frame to unite progressives. Our language and writing and speech would augment this frame with specifics, such as economic and racial justice, and justice for the earth, as we speak of universal health care, education and sustainability.
Thanks for your response, Lena. I'm with you on Heather's instigation to the study of history. Watching her FB chat on Jan 14, my husband (who takes time from work to watch) and I laughed with delight at her obvious delight at telling us real stories from the past. I've never seen anything like it. Just think if teachers in other disciplines could do the same!
You made me think of advertising and wonder how it fits in. You know, I often think of politics/current events as a huge, colorful graphic with bubbles and arrows, animated to show the bits that grow and shrink in relation to it all and to emphasize that one bit forces another this way or that. Something like Hans Rosling's animated statistics, or a Wait But Why cartoon set in motion. I can SEE that one thing influences another. Yesterday somebody recommended the book, Elmer Gantry, and I started to read it. Immediately there are Trump (Elmer) and Roger Stone (Elmer's pal, Jim).
I do wonder why we like to deceive each other. I don't. So why do some others?
Advertising used to “advertise” features and then later it was figured out that “benefits” are why people choose to purchase. And then psychology came into the advertising arena and ad execs learned that appealing to peoples’ sense of belonging (using Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs) could change a single purchase into a lifelong relationship which of course guaranteed corporate profits. Today people will intentionally spend more money on an identical product in terms of function and form simply because it has a particular name or logo on it. They want to “belong” to a certain group.
Thank you for the George Lakoff reference. I checked him out. Which of his books are you referring to?
Sorry I took so long to respond to you.
I’ve often recommended Lakoff, not so much because his ideas influence my own as because there's a correspondence. His central thesis about framing and the metaphor is one to which I'd given much thought decades earlier, when I was an eighteen-year old writing a treatise on painting. .
I was thinking at the time about various ways of relating to Nature, how we are in the world, how we see it, our place in it; and comparing painting in the Western tradition since the Renaissance with Chinese painting.
That may sound very esoteric, but it isn't really. Lakoff and many others speak of the influence of the 18th century Enlightenment, but there's much in our world view that goes back to the Renaissance, hundreds of years earlier.
Anyway, for Lakoff, I guess the starting point should be Metaphors We Live By, written with Mark Johnson. Reissued 2008.
Coming to the political implications of framing issues:
Moral Politics, How Liberals and Conservatives Think (3rd edition 2016)
And Don’t Think of an Elephant (revised edition, 2014
Well, I see you've been into these, but here's another useful short cut:
Why it Matters How We Frame the Environment: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17524030903529749
I just downloaded a sample of "Don't Think of an Elephant."
Good point Becky. I have frequently felt the effects of being gaslighted in conversation during the last four years. I too have demanded definitions during debate. Unfortunately without agreed upon definitions we aren’t really conversing. It is maddening if one really wants a conversation to end up just circling the point.
Logical argument doesn't work. We have to think of another way. In a past job in customer service, a teacher used the example of a runaway horse and carriage. Said rather than holding up your arm before it and shouting, "Stop!" you need to mount the horse (not sure how this was accomplished) and gradually slow it down. I understood this to mean that if you want to fix a customer's problem, you must listen to their argument carefully enough to understand how to "slow the horse down." You must be genuinely empathetic. This is very hard to do. I think something like this might work with Trump supporters, but it means facing my own biases and resentments, and so far I haven't been able to let them go well enough to get anywhere near that horse.
What if your "bias" is truth?
It is indeed hard to do. I have friends who are Republicans who are willing to engage in political conversations over lunch (pre-Covid). It is amazing to me that people I have so much in common with could have such opposing political views. But sitting across from them, one on one, allows for discussions that help to understand why this or that policy upsets them. In the end, it always comes back to them advocating for what they believe is best for themselves and their loved ones. Just like me. Perhaps it would be helpful to view others as “us” instead of “others”. Like when as a child in grade school teachers had us write letters to pen pals in foreign countries - in my case countries considered communist - so that we could see the humanity of those who lived there.
Also trying to read articles from sources supporting other views can expand your horizons as well as reading books with opposing viewpoints. For instance, I’m reading Blackout by Candace Owens to get a perspective on why some believe black people should abandon the Democrat Party. I’ll admit it isn’t easy to read because I disagree with her point of view, but I feel it is important to read so that I understand what the issues are - not her solutions. I believe I can think for myself. But I know I don’t know what someone else’s problems are. I’m a big reader, so this method helps me understand.
It would be interesting to have stats on how many have re-read, or read for the first time, our Constitution since T**** came into office.
I haven’t re-read the Constitution recently, but I’ve sure done a lot of thinking about it. As Fiona Hill says in a January 11 op-ed on Politico (link on Jan. 17 HCR, easy to find), “Yes It Was A Coup,” American democracy has been stress tested. In a big way. I felt confident for four years, but still, who needs this level of anxiety. We are all about to breathe a very big sigh of relief. We passed the test, but boy, I have a lot of weaknesses been exposed.
Hi Roland! Someone made a comment on something I wrote which has taken me all the way back to HCR in January! Many of us have missed you on HCR's forum...hope your book writing is coming along!
warmly,
Penelope
Yes. The only thing he is good at is labeling in his upside-down world. Examples: trying to steal the election away from Biden while calling it “stop the steal”... degrading our country while calling it “make America great again”... professing to love the US military while trashing Gold Star families, allowing Russia to put bounties on our troops’ heads, and bending our military for his political optics.
That’s not true. He and his cohorts are running the country......right into the ground, just to make Biden’s job harder.
I too marched proudly, flanked by my two daughters.
It must be especially painful for you wonderful women who peacefully marched with your children and grandchildren, to now see such violent desecration of our Capitol, with the intent of killing elected officials and overturning our government. There couldn’t be a starker contrast.
My daughters are in their 30’s now. They have a clear perspective of when we were in DC marching several years back. We are a society now of where our mental health needs a lot of help.
I have marched too, and took 2 of my grandchildren to one. They participated by making signs beforehand and enjoyed the gathering of peaceful, like-minded people.
I too marched, along with my wife. Our Democratic Congressman enthusiastically addressed the large crowd, in Napa, CA., at that time
I love that men marched with the women. Thank you.
He is my rep too.
One of my sons participated too - but we couldn't find each other in the crowds and cell phone service was cut off.
I was at the Women's March too - I was overwhelmed with good feeling there. Not a single instance of violence that I know of. Such a contrast!!
*overthrow* We need an edit option.;-)
But do they truly want a democracy? Aren't democracy and white supremacy antithetical?
You have gotten to the root of the problem in (counting...) 13 words. This is a wound so deep and so wide that it cannot possibly heal itself. It's beyond time to stop going all Scarlett O'Hara, i.e., "I'll think about that tomorrow. Tomorrow is another day!" How now, right now?!
Exactly.
Though I have heard right-wing adherents claim that the US is not a democracy, but a republic. Again, a matter of definition; I think they’re making an argument for the US as an agglomeration of fifty states, with states’ rights superseding federal law. The claim against democracy (governance by the people through elected representatives) in favor of republicanism leads too easily to the idea of autocracy; it’s a bit of an apples and oranges comparison, and the fuzzy logic of the comparison makes it useful for dividing the electorate.
In reading this history of Right Wing illogic of ignoring laws against their taking of public lands for private use, I got a big picture of Medieval History (Also known as The Dark Ages), with little fiefdoms all over Europe run by local kings & barons with serfs being exploited.
I, too, marched in DC in 2017. A gathering of prescient patriots. I remember standing outside the fence that surrounded the inauguration grounds. Littered with the detritus of trumpists from the day before. Foreshadowing?
I was outraged when we came upon the rows and rows of 1000s of portapotties that day of the March. Every one of them was locked shut with a padlock!
I thought, how hateful! Let's tip these suckers over! My grown daughter's cooler head prevailed and she talked me down...
Her words, "Mom, this is supposed to be PEACEFUL!"
They did that with the portapotties? Jeez, they would make a hyena blush with embarrassment to think they were both mammals...
They absolutely did! I took pictures. Alas, this story did not make the news, but it SURE would have if I woulda tipped the first one over...I am quite sure the rest of them would have quickly fallen! A million women looking at padlock potties = definition of frustration. Dumped shot on Pennsylvania ave, yeah, that would have been news.
Shit, shit!
You can easily get good bolt cutters at Lowes or home depot. ( I like Home Depot because they require masks). Depending on the gauge of steel in the lock would determine how big of bolt cutters one would need. I think at least a foot of handle. Make sure you get the kind that has a mechanical advantage mechanism for really fast cutting/ease of use. And Practice on some locks so you know how to use them. ( I only say this, because, like with any tool, I've learned the hard way with the wrong tool or using it the wrong way.....many times.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolt_cutter#:~:text=A%20bolt%20cutter%2C%20sometimes%20called,maximize%20leverage%20and%20cutting%20force.&text=Center%20cut%20has%20the%20blades,two%20faces%20of%20the%20blade.
https://www.homedepot.com/p/Milwaukee-14-in-Bolt-Cutter-With-5-16-in-Max-Cut-Capacity-48-22-4014/303182026
I’m with Pamsy. My first thought was bolt cutters. Fuck the assholes who put padlocks on those doors, it’s an easy fix. Porta potties do not come with padlocks. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a padlock on a porta-potty. Not ever. Some jerk had to buy padlocks and walk down that line and install them.
Yup, it was really a strange and insulting sight. We all decided next peaceful march we would put a nice pair of boltcutters into our day pack!
And unfortunately they would arrest you for carrying a potentially deadly weapon!
Dirty tricks are not nice. Roger Stone is not nice.
Bolt cutters? I’m not an anarchistic but when you gotta go, you gotta go!
So lame to do that
I was also at the march but never encountered locked portapotties unless they were occupied. Maybe there was a benign reason for padlocking some?
The story that was circulating was they were installed for the inauguration, not for us, so they were padlocked. There were rows and rows of hundreds if not 1000s.
I ran across a line of them on the Mall as we were heading for the Metro to go home. They weren't locked then but maybe someone had found a key?
I was there too. The locks had been busted off some of them. Do you remember how he made them put tape over the company's name on them? Don's Johns! Rotten person, terrible president, no sense of humor.
Glad to hear some were busted open!
My daughters and 12 year old granddaughters accompanied me to the 2017 Women's March in Chicago, and to a March for our Lives demonstration ; I did not consider that we might be in danger, and we were not.
Agreed . . . we never felt unsafe! It was initially a passing thought when my friends and I headed into Boston (large crowds can be intimidating), but that immediately evaporated when we got closer and felt the positive energy (even though we all were revolted by trump) and goodwill in the crowds on the subways and streets. The police had a great time too!
I marched with a friend in a Women's March in Tucson AZ. It was wonderful, with women, men, children and dogs. And brilliant signs! But I have to admit I was on the alert, and checking the tops of buildings for men with guns. I thanked two of the policemen who were there to keep us safe. Their big smiles told me that they were unused to being thanked during an event like that.
You are correct: "Maintaining a democracy and rule of law takes work by an educated, informed, and involved electorate."
I add to this list of requirements for democracy a vibrant middle class that allows the majority to earn a "good" living.
Income inequality is the greatest threat to democracy today.
And that income equality includes race. They are intertwined, in my view.
Well said. I was in one of those marches. NOTHING like what I witnessed on January 6.
I participated in the march in Boston in 2017. It was surreal in such a great way! trump and his followers have now tried to take from us the joy of the Biden/Harris Inauguration. However, even with no physical crowds, the barbed wire, and military protective presence, there is going to be a huge collective shout of joy once that oath of office is taken on January 20th!! It will be Zoomed around the world to an audience that far exceeds any other inauguration (with the possible exception of Obama's first)!
We should all step outside and beat on pots and pans and blow horns at the moment, no matter where we are.
Using social media, New Yorkers began the nightly ritual of applauding and cheering health care workers at 7 pm every evening as a way to celebrate the efforts of those on the frontline of the Coronovirus pandemic. #ClapBecauseWeCare
https://www.npr.org/2020/04/10/832131816/every-night-new-york-city-salutes-its-health-care-workers
I have some noisemakers from NY Eve.
Yes I’m bracing for joy— please.
Are there any physical distance/mask wearing, outside gatherings planned in each state to cheer Biden/Harris on and to be filmed as part of the inauguration?
I haven't heard of any in the greater Boston area. I think the potential for nutcases to appear throughout various cities is a deterrent for law abiding citizens to congregate. And, not least of all, given the surge in COVID cases (along with the more contagious strains now out there) I would think most (wise) people are not going to gather in crowds even outside and distanced.
Thank you for your assessment and words of wisdom, Janet!
I don’t know who the organIzers are, but I saw a Facebook post tonight for one in Denver. I commented, urging them to call it off.... as if anyone cares what I think. All the chatter on Twitter and Facebook is that there is violence planned in every Capitol this week. City and State governments want us to stay home. It’s a shame, but there will be other opportunities.
My neighborhood is quiet as a tomb.
I was also at the crowd at the Boston 2017 "march" which was so huge it was actually a peaceful standing together. I was also among 6,000 at Faneuil Hall peacefully demonstrating to uphold the ACA. The latter was a particularly diverse crowd. In both local and national lawmakers addressed us. I had no fear of expressing my concerns or being in the crowd. My heart breaks that this is no longer possible, between the pandemic and fear of violence.
My experience as well! I travelled from California to Washington DC, where the marching route was ‘grid-locked’ by protesters, all peaceful! It was an amazing day especially knowing virtually every country on the planet in multiple cities was also protesting ... absolutely NO violence!!!
Yep: I was there too in KC with my brother and my then-partner. It was a wonderful day, but the thing that disturbed me a bit about these marches is how white they were. Many of the speakers in KC were BIPOC but the marchers themselves were not. This apparently was a national trend and discussions of how the Women's March has played out over the last four years exemplifies the struggle of the Women's Movement in general: it has always had trouble embracing diversity and inclusion; the leadership is mostly white, well-educated, and middle-class. Sigh. As a feminist this makes me a little nuts.
Well, as feminists we can look around for causes we believe in that are led by Black women, and support them. For now, for me, that means a monthly donation to Fair Fight. With Kamala Harris as VP (hooray!!!!), an administration committed to working for ALL the people, and room to push them in whatever we see as the best direction - I look forward to having to pick and choose between progressive causes to support.
Maybe the next Women's March should call on Stacey Abrams to do some recruiting...
The second time that I marched in Tucson, there was a large group from the Tonono O'odham nation with us, or we were with them... They were so proud to be there in their traditional clothing and musical instruments. The Vermont marches, where I live, were pretty much all-white due to our population.
Wow, that’s a beautiful image.
My friends and I also noticed there weren’t a lot of women of color. I would not begin to know all the reasons why that happened but I think the marches that January helped ignite a wave of underserved communities and women being empowered to get elected and appointed to local, state, and federal positions where real change begins. Hillary Clinton, Michelle Obama and others have worked behind the scenes the past 4 years, to mentor women in the rough and tumble ways of politics and we need to keep that going.
My daughters and I were at the 2019 Women’s March in DC. I have participated in marches against injustices for 50 years. I loved being there. The energy fed off of everyone, man or woman, LGBTQ, all races, made me feel like I was being enveloped in understanding and love. It was awesome!
Too many Karens are out there for POC to trust white women. Their zealotry is often much worse than white men who are supremely comfortable and convinced they will do just fine no matter what changes--whereas the women are less secure.
Someone recently suggested that we shift the label from "Karens" to "Ivankas!" <3
The label “Karen” is so unfair to all the caring women with that name. I second this motion!
I am all for that!!!
Yeah I’m never going to use that expression. “Ivankas” works for me! My sister’s name is Karin, she is a sweetheart and a honey bunny and would never dream of taking advantage of anybody else with a power-play because she’s white. She would fit in really well right here on HCR.
words well spoken.
After that day in 2017, American women spent the next 4 years saying ENOUGH! All the secrets we held to keep a toxic marriage, a toxic job, or a toxic government came bursting out as a testimony of our oppression. And as we had our day, we learned to listen to others who are systematically oppressed and ORGANIZED to change our fate.
That fate will not happen without pushback from those who feel they now have lost. These folks have used one method to maintain the upper hand - violence and terror.
The four of us (two MN friends, my young adult granddaughter, and I) invited Phyllis, an African American woman who didn't have a "posse" of her own, to join us. We five hung out together all day. Well, most of the day. Got separated 2:3 for a while, but reconnected eventually. Phyllis and I are still in touch periodically. Perhaps the makeup of our posse clouded my overall vision of diversity that day. What I do remember is having been kind of gobsmacked (in a good way) by the turnout of so many men for that march.
Yes, what a beautiful day that was. Celebrated in cities around the world, it was a joyous celebration of what’s possible.
My only negative memory of the Women's March in 2017 was standing in line for around 40 minutes for a chance at a lone Porta potty and then discovering a long line of them on the Mall. Oh well, I got to talk to my friend Beth for a long time while we crossed our legs and danced!!
Dear Professor Cox Richardson (showing my respect for your work),
or dear Heather (showing my sentiments),
I am a new paying subscriber after having read the free version for some time, because "content must be paid by those who consume it" if we are to have a balanced information society.
I am an Austrian citizen, live on the edge of Vienna, with many ties to the United States of America, having lived there as an exchange student and having visited the country more than 80 times since then.
I engage in US politics and society because I see all around me in Europe and elsewhere that the US has a leading role in shaping global politics, global political and social values, global economic and environmental behavior and global culture.
Sometimes Twitter participants have told me "you are not from here, so stay out". That would be wrong, because just like US right-winger behavior (left, too, but less at this time) influences anti-democratic currents here in Europe, moderate and progressive US initiatives encourage similar initiatives in European society.
So, after having put my money where my mouth has been :-): Please continue your good work, Heather!
-Peter Prischl-
Moedling (Vienna), Austria
Yes, thanks for the reminder, Peter. I’m another European and, while you wrote, I’d not yet found the time to send in the remark that follows. Today’s letter gives much needed historical perspective to the current crisis, but…
All eyes in America are turned inward. All eyes throughout the world are turned on America. But this creates a dangerous diversion at a time when the effects of the imploding Trump presidency affect the entire world. And we should all know by now that, for dictators and gangster politicians, diversions are the very stuff of politics, distracting attention while they carry out whatever crimes they’ve been planning for the moment when opportunity knocks.
So Americans should not forget to keep an eye open for what’s happening elsewhere and to draw the necessary lessons, even where there’s no recourse to immediate remedial action.
Keep an eye on Moscow today. Endangered sclerotic regimes become more and more dangerous and more and more oppressive…
Yes, Peter Burnett. I would recommend the interview with Samantha Power, the incoming USAID Administrator, on Pod Save America last week. It's available on YouTube, I believe.
Oops - that's Pod Save the World.
Yes, I've just looked. Thank heavens! What more can I say?
Except that reports of the activities of the We Wuz Robbed Party still sound more like the kind of news we might expect from the most world's newest and most unstable countries. And they're still talking of their bargain-basement Elmer Gantry and the Almighty in the same breath...
Only recently did I find that my contention about collective madness had been expressed better than I could ever put it by no less than Friedrich Nietzsche:
“In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.”
This is worse than Covid 19, but it's the combination between virus and delirium that's far more troubling. As Samantha Power put it:
“You can be shocked but not be surprised at the same time”.
Thank you for your viewpoint. It’s important, today, to be a citizen of the world-no matter our physical location. ❤️🤍💙
I believe this is one of the big sources of the divide in American politics. Those of us who believe we are citizens of Planet Earth first, and Americans second, have the ability to look at the larger picture. We believe in nations working together for solutions that plague the world. We believe that nations need to support one another in saving the planet, setting fair trade regulations, preventing wars and responding to pandemics. Those who believe in America First don't care about the rest of the world, aren't capable of connecting their actions to a big picture, view those outside their immediate circles as Other. They respond to flashpoint terms such as Globalism, Radical Left, Socialism, Freedom without reflection. They say they want strong leaders but worship strongmen. Their ideas about individual liberties leave no room for the behavioral norms of the larger community.
While my place of birth and my government issued passport declare that I am an American, I have always put my citizenship of Earth in first position. National and state borders are artificial. Our shared humanity is indisputable fact.
Brilliant! This is the Golden Rule. This is love. Thank you for such a concise post describing our spiritual pandemic. tRump has amplified discontent, not respect for anything but the big ME. I do hope everyone reading content like this also find time to offset their worldview by reading books and articles from leaders who support Lanita's view, a positive view of how it can be if we all get on with it! I'm currently reading a book by John Lewis. His always forward, peacefully towards the goal with buckets of common sense is awesome. Onward!
May I ask what Lewis book you are reading? I've been reading a lot of political memoirs/autobiographies/thought lately. Waiting for a couple by Stacey Abrams.
I also rented for $2.00 this video about Mr. Lewis - also very good. https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/B087QQQVKC/ref=atv_dp_share_cu_r
Across That Bridge - A Vision for change and the future of America. I have the audio book version. I'm about 90 minutes in. Very inspiring.
Thank you for the recommendations.
Hear Hear 👏 applause applause 👏
It would be really nice if the people all over the world show they care on Jan 20. The bigger the celebration, the better. We could use a little moral support over here and a little less looking on in horror and fear or glee at our failures and ignorance.
I WILL show my support on January 20, Martha!
Thank you, from the bottom of my heart.
Thank you Mr. Prischl, it is good hearing perspectives from outside the US. Heather is truly a gift during these extraordinarily hard times, I too have recently subscribed because I want her to have help keeping the white supremacist tirades away from her work, along with administrative help with the posting process. Nancy, Richmond VA
Thank you, Nancy, for helping Heather with this!
Welcome, Peter. Some of the best perspectives of Americans strengths and weaknesses have traditionally come from those who straddle it with ties to other countries (e.g. Alexis de Tocqueville). IMO, America's richness is greatly enhanced by its visitors, new arrivals, and diversity.
Welcome to this community and this exchange of ideas!
I believe an international perspective is necessary today.
I recall be at a research library in Berlin summer 2008 when another patron, recognizing I am American, said to me "Obama! Obama! Obama!"
I visited Moedling in 2006 -- a lovely town and the home of musician Arnold Schoenberg!
Moedling and Schoenberg - wonderful! Our house is just one block from his, owned by the Arnold Schönberg Center and used for research, small performances and some museum rooms. Come back
Yes! I visited both Schoenberg's Moedling House and the Center at Schwartzenbergplatz. Hope to return someday!
Willkommen von einer Kölner.
No wonder I like you and your commentary.
Welcome, Peter. The fact that we are all citizens of the world is often overlooked. Lucky you, living in beautiful Vienna! So nice that lovely Heather brings us together.
Welcome! Yes, we are all in this together. Our words and actions have meaning - oftentimes in ways and places far beyond what we originally intended. Looking forward to the international perspective you can bring to this forum.
Welcome, Peter. Glad you have joined us and found what Heather is doing worth contributing to. We have more than a few in the community from countries outside the US and i enjoy reading their thoughts.
Yes - European and American hate groups nourish each other. We share the challenge of balancing individual rights with group rights, strengthening a democracy that supports freedom of all while prohibiting actions that take away the safety and rights of others. Even freedom of speech draws the line at shouting a false cry of "Fire!" that might cause lethal panic.
Welcome Peter— the more the merrier
Welcome Peter, it is wonderful to read your opinion.
Welcome! Please continue to share a global perspective, as that is what is needed now.
Welcome Peter. We In America need to hear that what takes place here can have both a negative or positive influence on the global stage.
Welcome from the geographical heart of America in Kansas City.
ahhh, the home of Sharice Davids (KS) or Emanuel Cleaver (MO) - congratulations on both accounts!
Been there, liked it!
There are additional sides of this. Listen to Jenna Ryan after her arrest in connection with the insurrection in the capitol on January 6:
“I don’t feel a sense of shame or guilty from my heart. I feel like I was basically following my president. I was following what we were called to do. He asked us to fly there. He asked us to be there. So I was doing what he asked us to do,” Ryan said. “I do feel a little wronged in this situation because I’m a real estate agent and this has taken my company. This has taken my business. I am being slandered all over the internet, all over the world and all over the news and I’m just like a normal person.”
Somebody else, speaking in 1960 after their arrest in connection with World War 2:
“To sum it all up, I must say that I regret nothing. My heart was light and joyful in my work, because the decisions were not mine. Obeying an order was the most important thing to me. It could be that is in the nature of the German. I had to watch the madness of destruction, because I was one of the many horses pulling the wagon and couldn't escape left or right because of the will of the driver, I now feel called upon and have the desire to tell what happened. I was never an anti-Semite. … My sensitive nature revolted at the sight of corpses and blood... I personally had nothing to do with this. My job was to observe and report on it. I am certain, however, that those responsible for the murder of millions of Germans will never be brought to justice.”
(Of course the somebody else is Adolf Eichmann. This is an assemblage of quotes from comments he made over several years. I'm not saying the crimes of the insurrectionists in general, or Ryan in particular, are similar to Eichmann. But the mindset is frighteningly similar.)
I am not sure Trump will pardon Ryan or others from January 6 who are all saying in essence “I was invited to the Capital by the President”, given his own defense is that he didn’t say anything that incited the insurrection. Like so many others, these folks may be about to discover that Trump’s self-interest outweighs any sense of responsibility to people who have followed.
I guess tRump could be stupid enough to grant pardons to some of these thugs, but it seems to me that if he does he admits he incited them in some way. Wouldn't look good at his impeachment trial as the pardons could be used against him.
Someone is suggesting tRump is considering blanket pardons for all of the patriots involved.
In a truly corrupt development,
Prospect of Pardons in Final Days Fuels Market to Buy Access to Trump
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/17/us/politics/trump-pardons.html?referringSource=articleShare
Yes Trump has always been all about himself and his brand. It’s sad so many people bought into his pathetic jargon.
And Jenna Ryan is so deeply convinced of her "calling" she's already calling for a pardon.
Pardons are coming. Knowing Trump, he’ll announce a large list of pardons on Wednesday morning right before the inauguration, just to draw attention away from Biden. I hope the media doesn’t take the bait.
It seems to me any pardon(s) by Trump will open a constitutional can of worms.
Legal/Constitutional questions; (My own)
-Is a person eligable for a presidential pardon prior to being convicted or even indicted? Can that pardon be "post-dated" beyond the president's term in office? -Does an impeached but not yet tried in the Senate president retain the power to pardon anybody?
-Can an an impeached but not yet tried in the Senate president pardon a person prior to (or even after) that person's conviction, if that person's aledged criminal behavior was directly involved in the actions that got the president impeached?
-Can an impeached etc. president, prior to any trial, pardon himself, and is that not, per se, a confession of guilt?
The pardon power reads "except in cases of Impeachment." That has been taken to mean it cannot be used to undo an impeachment. I would argue - for what it's worth, as I'm not a lawyer - that it also means that a president impeached for an offense cannot pardon others involved in the same offense.
I forgot about that! (Not a lawyer either.) I can’t tell you how much I hope you are right.
I hope ur right
And, let’s hope that sharp lawyers will argue that everyone he is planning to pardon is involved in the same charges as what is in the articles of impeachment. The presidential pardon was never intended to be used by a corrupt president (who incited a violent overthrow of the government!) to a “get out of jail free” for himself and those who were complicit. Not that we would ever expect anything different, but trump has not even gone through the appropriate pardon process We need some pit bull lawyers to step up to the plate and not let this go!
All great questions; I fear the answers.
An impeachment is analogous to an indictment, and we still believe someone is innocent until proven guilty. The answer to all your questions, I think, is yes, except maybe the post-dated one. The pardon power is pretty broad. Self-pardon is another question. And that one would have to be tried by the courts, and I think we all think it will be, unless Trump resigns and Pence pardons him.
The lame duck still has wings. I can’t believe he’s not out already. Too risky
"An impeachment is analogous to an indictment..."
It's more analogous to a negative job evaluation. It's not a criminal justice proceeding. No one goes to jail or pays a fine. (Hopefully, with Trump, that comes after he's been axed.) When you come right down to the constitutional legalities as I understand them, all you really need to fire the President are the votes in the House and Senate.
But I think your argument is the correct one; an impeached president retains all powers and responsibilities until a conviction in the Senate makes him no longer the President.
The scary thing is that Fake 45 may just give it to her! I think we simply cannot be surprised what his evilness will reveal in the next few days.
You got that right
To me, these 2 people who feel no guilt are examples of shirking the responsibility of thinking about your own actions and doing the right thing regardless of what the “herd” does or they are told to do by another. To me, these people exhibit a “lemming” mentality.
As well as white privilege, entitlement and arrogance.
Following orders is no excuse. Ryan still made a choice to act on her perception of what she heard. OtherS heard those same words, and chose not to "storm the Capitol".
But, soldiers are tried and convicted, correct? Being brainless is no excuse for breaking the law.
And of course these folks just wind up sounding like followers of Marshall Applewhite waiting for the approach of the Hale-Bopp comet.
Very similar indeed! I remember Eichmann’s trial vividly, watching it on my parents tv, in black and white. I was young but it always stuck in my head. I agree with your summary.
They have been radicalized and still don’t understand. They will live the rest of their lives this way. Broken humans unable to contribute anything positive or rational to their national debate.
Wow thanks
What I find most upsetting is the collective American weak mindedness that allowed a sociopathic grifter to not only win the presidency, but to turn the entire country upside down with little if any real resistance from the citizenry and more importantly, the people we elect and trust to protect the country.
It's embarrasing.
It seems that many individuals experiencing economic woes and listening to evasive politicians became desperate for some good news. Then a messenger appeared, one they saw as caring about their needs. They were hoping for rescue and ready to believe. Trump has a talent for lying, and his lies worked on these very stressed individuals.
That's my take on this sad situation in our country.
Ralph makes and important point: "many individuals experienced economic woes..." I don't believe either party was addressing the economic issues that affected ordinary Americans. I think the Dems (and the traditional Repubs as well) failed miserably to respond to the issues of struggling Americans, or even explain why government is of value. But the non-traditional, circus show, appealed crudely to those concerns and won the election of 2016. If the country can ever be returned to its "norms" it seems essential that the needs of working people must be vigorously addressed. Corporate money-lords and wealthy donors have controlled which political issues are addressed and they do not care about workers. They care about profits. To imagine that it took 20 years to even have a $15 an hour federal wage PROPOSED by a President is a good indicator of how one-sided our politics have been and why so many don't trust the government to do the very thing that allows ordinary people to thrive.
And even if the Biden/Harris administration is able to shepherd the $15/hr federal minimum through both houses, $15/hr is no longer a living wage in many parts of the country. Let's say take-home at that wage is about $1900/mo. In my small city, it's hard to find even a studio apartment for under $1,000. That leaves $900 for food, transportation, clothing, health care, utilities. A single person might be able to do it, but anyone with children can't. Certainly, it isn't possible to save at that rate.
...and still it took 20 and it's only "proposal"! And if enacted it won't be a living wage! Exactly.
Do you think that people with economic woes really have the kind of money to pay for gas to travel, to buy little hats and flags that say trump on them? I don’t think so. I don’t think these people are desperate economically I think they’ve been deceived. Honestly I think these people are greedy for attention, uneducated. People looking for an exciting party! Something that gives them an identity. Yes, this is a gross generalization not all of these people are this way. There are educated people. People that believe they are Christians. It is this group I don’t understand.
That's true, but I was only referring to the election. These seditionists are drawn from a different distribution.
Buses were arranged for them to get there and back.
Supposedly, Clarence Thomas’ wife helped arrange that. And yet, he caused yet another black man to be executed this week. SCOTUS is tainted, badly.
How could CT not see the light? Reading about Jackie Robinson 1964 is really something courageous. Robinson had the voice of Rockefeller & Nixon, but learned to despise Goldwater's divisive game plan.
Such a good question. I just can’t understand how a person of color gets enamored with a party that despises them.
This fact about Thomas’ wife, which I believe is well substantiated, is absolutely outrageous.
https://www.aol.com/news/clarence-thomas-wife-supported-rioters-231103492.html
The Racialization is pervasive. "ah, Houston, we have a problem."
Horrid.
And private jets from all over the country. The Well off bring their friends to the insurrection
Grrrrr
People in my state are taking screen shots on those who posted on SM travelling to DC, Staying at the DT Hotel, and sending to the FBI. Reminds me of the Oligarchs and European princes at the Battel of Bull Run.
Watch this develop. NBC news reports several stories of DT supporters getting invited on wealthier supporters private jets to participate.
Reporting today and yesterday points to fund raisers on Go Gund Me and an enormous transfer of bitcoin from an address in France.
But ... he did not deliver on those expectations and yet MORE of them voted for him last November! It is that that confounds me.
His showmanship continues to delude his followers. It is an essential power of a cult leader to continually mesmerize his followers with the beauty of "the future" he will provide. It is just ahead! For Trump, if it hadn't been for "those losers," he could have accomplished so much more, "and if re-elected, I will."
Like followers in an end-of-the-world cult. No matter how many times the Great Leader's forecast fails, they are still ready to jump on the next end-is-nigh prediction.
Scientists are still baffled!
Interesting...My college-age son says that one reason people like the Republigcan message is because it is more positive (We're great, we're the best, we're gonna be greater) while the Democrat message is negative (We have a lot of problems we need to fix, fix, fix).
Good point. One side with its head in the ground as the stampede approaches denying the oncoming charge; the other shouting "look out!" but is perceived as "negative." I wonder how the deniers run their homes, families, businesses?
Just loaded the dryer and wondered if BOTH sides want to "fix" things but they want to fix very different things. And each side considers the other side "negative." Laundry thoughts. 😊
Right, they are more positive about our own country and more negative about everyone else. On the other hand they always seem to be in critique mode, never in a "that's good" kind of mood.
Hmmm this makes sense
The Republicans I know who are financially stable (and white Christians) are strongly military and executives. They don't know any life other than "I give orders. I follow nobody. I've been trained to do this." I fear there is now way to reach these types. And they personify the happiest people on earth.
If you haven’t already read it, check out Heather’s letter from March 28th .... very interesting.
Thanks for pointing me to that letter. That is from before I was a subscriber... um, substacker.
Most upsetting yes, repugnatins enabling.
I agree completely and I can’t wrap my head around it.
You can wrap your head around it when you understand that it’s all about race and has been from the beginning. Only 0.1% of the electorate is concerned about “redistribution of wealth” (as the obscenely wealthy call it). That doesn’t affect elections. What most white people are concerned about, now, in FDR’s time, in Eisenhower’s time, and in all periods of American history, is fair treatment of black people. They are against it. Sixty percent of white people oppose fair treatment of black people. At all levels and in all domains. Economic, judicial, and social. When you understand that, you can wrap your head around American politics.
You are absolutely right, Rex, about the foundational effects of pervasive racism on people's political and social views. But don't overlook the abilities of the 0.1% to use allegations about economic "unfairness"--makers v. takers, welfare cheats, etc.--to draw support for what ends up being redistribution of wealth upwards.
Yes, you’re right, Tom. The wealthy don’t have the votes themselves but have outsized influence, the tax system is regressive, and the entire economy overwhelmingly favors the already wealthy. About the only optimism I can offer is that the 60% of white people who favor oppression of Americans with non-European ancestors was 80% in the 1950s and 90% before that, but it doesn’t matter which direction it goes from here because by 2040 (if we get that far), the rest if us will be able to easily outvote them.
I don't know how you do it, Heather. Almost every day, a balanced, thoroughly informed, beautifully written, incisive analysis of the working out of history in some sphere of the US. This time it is the evolution of "thought" up to the point of claims that "the federal government must turn over all public lands to the states to open them to private development" by a series of unhinged, bigoted, desperately selfish men (they were all men) from Rush Limbaugh and before, to Bundy, and now the loons who rushed the Capitol. And now want to be pardoned.
Your lesson for today is so important, and the world may be in a state to listen to it, put so luminously. I guess there is space to think about the Fairness Doctrine again, this time in the guise of a Federal Communications Commission (or whoever) for regulation of communication platforms and the enforcement of editorial accountability.
Reading your words from afar (the UK) there is one aspect of the history that you unfold that seems to be understated. In Europe - in our crowded countries - we have always given weight to the contribution of community to problems and to their solutions. In the wide-open spaces of America, you have always elevated the status of the single man fighting alone for his family, and downplayed, even disparaged, the role of collective solutions.
To me, the lot of them - Weaver, Koresh, McVeigh, Bundy (Cliven and Ammon) - all stand in the tradition of John Wayne and High Noon. They would say "proud tradition". I would say - dangerous. They would say "patriotic". I would say - undermining the nation by elevating private greed.
Of that lot, Koresh is, maybe, a different case. The role of cult psychology in a nation that fed on camp meetings and exclusive group self-identification is another story you should tell one day, and I recommend one of my compatriots to you: Fanny Trollope, Anthony's mother, The Domestic Manners of the Americans, 1832.
Thank you, again, Heather.
In both of her books I have read—The History of the Republican Party and How the South Won the Civil War—Heather spends much time framing America’s cowboy image, one Reagan used to great advantage during his campaigns. She does this especially in the latter, which is her most recent. If you haven’t read them, I can’t recommend them highly enough. I also have her book Wounded Knee; it’s in my queue. (Incidentally, the great James Baldwin also wrote about the myth of America, which included—among many things—these cowboy western films and images.)
Really enjoying how the south won...I didn’t know it was Buckley who birthed the advice, Republicans should give up on reasoned debate and should have a strategy appealing to passions and emotions.
Thank you. I have it, by the magic of Kindle.
We need to keep the good stuff, like HCR and Wikipedia and junk the bad stuff. How do you legislate for good intention?
Thank you too, Bob.
Ultra-individualism – the notion that each human being is a discrete, totally autonomous entity -- is a poisonous absurdity, one which when used as it has been in America and too many other countries, transforms citizens into free radicals infesting the body social and politic. It is commonly accompanied by the equally spurious idea (one also held by otherwise intelligent Inquisitors, frightened of their helpless prisoners) that by destroying the bodies of “bad” individuals, you destroy what they stand for. This doesn’t wipe out evil, it perpetuates it.
Think back to 1945. Those of us who grew up in postwar Europe did not expect any form of Nazism to arise from the ashes; but the evil that men did lived on, not always underground, in an endless chain reaction. It still lives, befouling all it touches: the innocent, the unborn, the miraculous planet we live on.
History is not dead people, dead ideas, in a dead past. The past is all too present. In us. Among us.
"the evil that men did lives on" . . . unless active, intelligent steps are taken to break the cycle. And even then, it is one step forward and likely another step back later. Look at the legacy of Mandela's magic of reconciliation in South Africa. But, I am still convinced that the overall direction can be forward. Have you come across a book by the Dutch Historian Rutger Bregman, "Humankind"? Well worth reading, and optimistic. Also this interview with Bregman will amuse you:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_nFI2Zb7qE&t=6s
Thank you Bob for your perspective from the UK, I appreciate it. Your first paragraph stays with me —- it is mostly selfish white men who want to turn our democracy into oligarchy. I see a few women and a couple Black men in the videos from Jan 6, but overwhelmingly it is white men. I agree the attraction is greed, especially for those more well off, but also perhaps they are attracted to physical fighting? More so than women in general?
And white men, as well as plenty of white women, will do anything to hold onto their power in the wider society.
Heather speaks often of our revered American cowboy image. Ugh. My childhood adoration of the cartwrights, poof!
We grew up with cowboys and “Indians”. Bang bang shoot em up. What brainwashing!
Yellowstone, the series with Kevin Costner, whose side am I on now?
We haven’t watched it yet... how is it?
I watched the first few episodes, but the whole big rich rancher doing his thing AND the tendency to get kind of soap-opera-drama-like just turned me off. I'm done with the whole cowboy image thing taking over the land - now public land - and cows everywhere. Could be it didnt continue in that vein - I've always like Kevin Costner, but I'm done.
Ha! Yes, and all the years of having a crush on the Mavericks!
I used to fantasize about having a cowboy as a boyfriend. Now I see a few of them out there rioting and I want to puke. 🤢
Which of the Cartwrights was that? My impression was that they were all meant to be terribly manly - mostly the men, anyway!
Bundy is a blow hard. He gets people rilled up, but he s a coward. Watch, he ll be outspoken but never in the front line of direct confrontation.
This is a helpful and long overdue clarification of "socialism," a term loosely bandied about by so many but understood by so few. Its use seems especially rampant by people whose only point of reference are the old communist models of Russia and China.
I think part HCR's comment isn't exactly correct. As a social theory, socialism posits that a collective cooperation of citizens will make all governmental institutions public. Yet as practiced in Denmark, Sweden, or India for example, private ownership exists in tandem with an emphasis on individual liberties, and collective cooperation is manifested in accessible and "free" health care, education, family leave, as well as those things that also exist in the US - public highways, libraries, and police and fire services, to name a few.
What's not so "free" is that income taxes are typically higher but they are offset, in part, by lower out of pocket expenses than we have here.
While both Socialism and Communism utilize some version of centralized planning, communism is the model where "property and economic resources are owned and controlled by the state (rather than individual citizens)."
(https://www.thoughtco.com/difference-between-communism-and-socialism-195448)
HCR's conclusion, however, is accurate whether living in a capitalist or socialist state - popular public policies which cost tax dollars and supported through progressive tax systems, where wealthier people have to help pay for programs that would everyone - is what chaps the asses of not only the 1% but of politicians who cater to those not particularly interested in the welfare of others so long as "they got theirs."
What we fail to realize is that "the efficiencies of the market" are designed to optimize profit when demand opportunities exist, but assume that 1) everyone has the means to purchase or not purchase as they like, or 2) if they don't have the means, that's their problem. In biblical terms, capitalism is equivalent to "I'm not my brother's keeper."
Look, I'd love to optimize my own life choices whenever and wherever possible. At one time I could. Cancer took away several years of "economic opportunity" from me and now it's harder to do so. Cancer wasn't my "fault" nor was the inability to work for some time. I'm not asking for anything free, but when the GOP was hot on "repeal and replace" of the ACA, in realized that circumstances had changed. When my carrier increased premiums from about $1200/month to $5000/month at the end of the year while I was still in treatment, it was clear I no longer fit the capitalist assumption that everyone can afford to choose or not. I couldn't afford at that point. And despite a diagnosis of "incurable Stage 4 cancer," I saw many people in far worse shape than I. Yet few of the people I know who grouse about socialism would've said "too bad, I guess you'll just have to die."
To me, that's the difference. No one should have to choose between bankruptcy and death, or unemployment vs building skills, or not having access to safety and security services like police and firemen.
If we're so scared of socialism then we cannot allow every industry to operate under a "maximize profits" model. Health care, education, pharmaceutical development, as examples, should be limited to a cost plus model. The government can and should help fund research and basic training and basic health services. Oh, by the way, that's consistent with a democratic socialist model but don't tell anybody.
I am sorry about your health issues, Scott. Your points are an interesting perspective.
I would like to take a stab at this as I have been spouting at trump supporters for 5 years about our socialist democracy to try to help them understand that if they are using a gazillion systems in our society that make our lives easier, safe and healthier for all, they are benefactors of a socialist democracy. It is hardly a dirty word. Whether you are rich or poor or in-between, we all benefit from our particular socialist democracy (which includes capitalism). That may be the rub? We are a beautiful conglomeration of the the peoples of the world, Under One Government. We are also an imperfect operational conglomeration that does not fit "socialist," "communist" or purely "capitalist. This appears difficult to explain to people who use one-word simplifications, on purpose or out of ignorance, because is it easy, useful propaganda, or they have not thought through all the facts. It is possible I am totally off-base. If I am not, then it is crucial that we educate the masses using Facts, thus we must have the Fairness Doctrine back as part of righting this ship. Words and truth are critical in a democracy.
Seems to me the intentions of those who appear to control everything want to maintain a racial caste system and have no interest in their brothers' and sisters' well-being.
Anand Giraharadas, https://the.ink/p/hope has written a great article describing what I have been referring to as "the death screams of the dying patriarchy." He shifts that perspective to what we are witnessing is the mourning or grieving of our white supremacist terrorists. They are mourning their place in the world as we become a more equality-based country. That little shift in perception has helped me to suddenly feel compassion for them in their fear and grief of no longer being superior—just because the color of their skins. We are witnessing their stage of anger. This is a Bingo! moment for me. A palpable sudden shift in my view of them. My compassion for them. (Psst! I may secretly love my hate for their despicable behaviors...so I have to marinate in this new perspective for awhile).
In our Heathersherd group, we were asked to come up with the most important things we could do to enable change right now. There was discussion of being able to talk with trump supporters who do not think like us. I have tried for five years, and, until I read Anand's article last night, I could not even IMAGINE wasting my time with the "cult." To me, white supremacy, nazism, proud boys, q-anon... are all impossible to have rational conversations with, a total waste of time, and are behaving like anti-Americans anti-Constitutionalists. I still think that, but I am suddenly more open to seeing them as sad, sad people fighting and mourning imaginary threats of their way of life. Look behind who has really riled them up...BIG MONEY. That Dark Money is all about power and control. America is actually moving forward and the mourners will not be able to stop the changes a'coming. There are many more of us in colorful forces ratcheting forward and We are the Source of money via our buying power. We need to choose wisely whilst we create this new world: "We the People — ALL of us this time." This includes all those grieving white, angry people. All of us. We need to help them understand that we can all prosper....equally, if given the chance. There is nothing to be afraid of with that vision. They are living in fear anyway. Maybe, let's try something different.
Media, books, films, art are such powerful tools. I believe we MUST utilize those tools, rapidly, so our masses are educated in school and outside of school. The dark films that are so rampant might need new films that are shifts in consciousness and creativity The broadway musical, Hamilton, is a great example of consciousness raising of our people via music, dance and seeing all colors of people as prominent thinkers. I know teens who are reading Chernow's 818 page, book on Hamilton's biography after seeing the broadway show. They are excited and pumped up to learning about America! Lin Manuel Miranda is a historical genius in what he has brought forth during this second, most critical period of America's development and vision. Have I reached 818 pages in this missive, yet?
I appreciate your comments as I do all those in this forum. Funny how timing comes into a person's life. This morning I read an article in the Chicago Tribune opinion section. It's an exploration of the American social system that looks a lot like a caste. Here is the link: https://www.chicagotribune.com/columns/dahleen-glanton/ct-glanton-capitol-insurrection-caste-20210111-qfdy3hy3rbeapdm77wmoyc5pmq-story.html
BTW - I've seen folks blocked by paywalls. I'd like to suggest to the group that your library should have lots of paywall news sources available free - just by signing up with your local library card. Mine allows me access to major magazines and newspapers. Cheers!
Oh, I just wrote a long response to you about the caste system and then it disappeared. Thanks for the article, and let's just say that I totally agree that we have a caste system here...and we all know what color is still at the top! Unfortunately, what many of us are striving for is all colors meeting together, in the middle and thriving by sharing with one another.
Penelope, after I responded to your comment I came across this article in my mail. It speaks to some of the issues I was trying to describe, but not as well as this author does.
The Importance of Twitter’s Trump Ban
https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-importance-and-incoherence-of-twitters-trump-ban
That was interesting. I think the media/social media have a lot of responsibility for the rise of DTJ. He is a celebrity/drama queen and sucks the air out of most situations so he is good for selling papers, shocking headlines and operating his so-called "presidency" and misinformation via late-night manic tweets.
I agree-- our internet media/social media has made the world much more complex and subject to soundbites and info that does not allow for much in-depth thinking.
And then add the trolls, bots, phishing, and targeted propaganda. In many ways we are able to connect and share information around the world immediately and in other ways, it is a pox on humanity. And then there are forums like this one where people can respectfully hash out our thoughts, hear interesting viewpoints, ideas and experiences and continue to grow and learn from the host and one another.
Penelope, one of the reasons I like this forum is the thoughtful exchanges that occur. (OTOH, too many commenters begin with some HCR worship. Don't get me wrong - she's fascinating and helps us all through interpretation and provision of historical context. But that's why we're here and we don't need to bow or curtsy before posting!)
In any case, the notion of "class mourning" is an interesting take, and it makes sense if we extrapolate individual emotions to society as a whole. However, going to your point about education, we try to teach kids that you "can't always get what you want" and that we can accomplish more by working together. These are tough lessons and it seems as if they're frequently forgotten as people get older. But while I'd have patience dealing with an individual who was mourning, I have no patience for a collective that, in its death throes, pursues a scorched earth strategy rather than seeking ways to adapt to new circumstances.
I think you're right - education about history and social models and community dynamics is critical, but my sense is that a larger issue is how 24/7 technology has backfired. The internet's promise of global interconnectedness has created an almost Pavlovian need for new information AND for validation of one's ideas. This reduces patience and lends itself to simplification or shorthand representations of complex ideas.
Who wants to go through a point by point comparison between capitalism, socialism, and communism when they can just say "socialism is bad?" Who wants to think about how elements of social models may cross over into other models? So technology and social media platforms enable you to connect with almost anybody as well as only with those who think like you do. 24/7 access also forces media sources to try come up with something new every hour. In practical terms that message saying the same thing in different ways or to add opinion or speculation in order to offer a "twist" that differentiates one source from another.
So you're not off base when you say "it appears difficult to explain to people who use one-word simplifications, on purpose or out of ignorance, because is it easy, useful propaganda, or they have not thought through all the facts." it's just like the entire GOP picking up the term "radical leftist agenda" of the Democrats. Even Bernie Sanders is not a radical leftist. I personally think Elizabeth Warren was the smartest candidate out there, I'm part because she not only spoke about topics but she documented them and she developed plans to show hoped she'd propose implementing those plans. Just because every industrialized nation has some form of universal health care doesn't mean it's wrong or radical, though that's what the GOP would have you believe.
Long story short (too late, I know), but yes, we must help educate people about "facts" but we cannot afford to slow our efforts to undo the damage that Trump has wrought and to address the critical issues of the pandemic and the economy and political polarization and becoming re-engaged with the world at large. We're not moving backwards to accommodate the feelings of one group that doesn't want to play ball.
Sorry for the rant, but thanks for your great reply.
Hi Scott, I just want to reply to your response to my response and then I will look at the link you just sent. I totally do not agree or condone in any way with the scorched earth policy behaviors of these dying patriarchal thugs. I can have compassion for the reason they are upset. Every single person who has committed sedition needs to pay the consequences. Grief is not a get out of jail free card. As I stated somewhere else today: Sedition. Felony. Twenty years.
I may be compassionate, but I do have strong boundaries and high expectations for human behaviors that go beyond the pale. I feel the same about T**p and all his cronies. None of them are above the law. Sedition is sedition, and attempting to overthrow our election is simply sedition. They should be charged accordingly.
(Additionally, every one of them owes our country reparations).
373. Keep going. "We the People - All of Us This Time'!
Yes Scott: Democratic Socialism (which is the system in Europe put into place by most of the western European countries sometime between 1945 and 1980) presupposes that humanity is better off if everyone is able to achieve the Four Freedoms FDR talked about (Ironically, on 6 January 1941): Freedom from Fear, Freedom from Want, Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Worship. The Freedoms from Want and from Fear are the issues we are really struggling with and have always done. What is different in Europe is that for the most part, parliamentary systems actually DO represent constituencies because they are based mostly on proportional representation, Center-Right parties (with some grumbling, admittedly) DO embrace--after decades of opposition and attempted privatization--principles like universal healthcare, a livable minimum wage, and affordable housing. But here is the problem: in Scandinavia, especially, where these systems work exceptionally well, with only the occasional hiccup (such as Sweden deciding to go for the "herd immunity" option re: COVID-19, which resulted in thousands of preventable deaths), the culture is quite monolithic. The number of non-white northern Scandinavians is extremely small. When refugees began to be welcomed into the system--especially from Turkey, Greece, Syria, Afghanistan, and Somalia--the Right began to try to legislate against their inclusion into the social safety net all "native" (read white Germanic) Swedes, Norse, and Danes enjoy. Racism is just below the surface. Sexism is not as big a deal, apparently, but I have colleagues in Norway who tell me that it is alive and well--also under the surface.
In order for the USA to adopt Democratic Socialist ideals (AOC advocates for this, and of course Bernie) there has to be a broad consensus that everyone has an equal right to freedom from want. That is unlikely to occur because of the racist embrace of American Exceptionalism that occurs not only on the Right but also on the Left.
The word for the politics that have had so much influence in Scandinavia (albeit less nowadays) is Social Democracy.
But almost all developed countries -- except the United States -- have healthcare systems that provide citizens with a safety net in case of illness which, as we have been seeing, is no respecter of beliefs or class distinctions. Or of Cain's response when God asked him where his brother was...
That said, you use that word Socialism (dirty to ultra-individualist American ears) too freely. Is Canada socialist? Is Switzerland socialist? Is Japan socialist?
Yes! Social Democracies is a term I feel might be accepted by Americans, over time. In contrast to Social Democracies, we have 'Private Greed’ of American capitalism.
As Lakoff remains us, "say what you mean, and mean what you say”, over and over again. The benefits of universal health care in a Social Democracy far outweighs the pain, poverty and suffering from the Private Greed of our profiteering health care system
Gotta take "social" out. Capitalistic Democracy? Isn't that our grand experiment? Democracy will cover workers and their families' education and healthcare, along with infrastructure, and environmental management (trying not to sound threatening to CEOs), freeing up business to focus on business.
Yes, I remember my affinity for Demorcatic Capitalism. We will have many people disagree with us, and so that is to be expected if we are say anything meaningful
Thank you for your clarification. I am a democratic socialist in my understandings, and in my support of messengers like AOC and Bernie Sanders-who has delivered a consistent message since the 60’s. It took me a lifetime, but I’m so far to the left now, I can no longer see the center. Here’s hoping the best for you. 🤞🏻❤️🤍💙
Unfortunately, Bernie did not get out ahead of the term ‘democratic socialist’. So, the term and his values got defined for him. He ought to have ALWAYS described the benefits of a European capitalism with its universal safety net, with specific examples of the taxes people paid, and how they benefited with little debt by individuals and families.
I wonder if you agree Deborah
I'm not Deborah but I agree! Someone like Pete Buttigieg could make it palatable and desirable without any "taint" of socialism.
“What we fail to realize is that "the efficiencies of the market" are designed to optimize profit when demand opportunities exist, but assume that 1) everyone has the means to purchase or not purchase as they like, or 2) if they don't have the means, that's their problem.”
Then we have the “essential” workers who are not paid a living wage.
So interesting and alarming that the families with bootstraps refuse to enable those without so that they may pull themselves up as well. The predation of the rich living off the labors of the poor. To me, it’s always about the distribution of wealth. always. And sadly.
Wishing you well, dear sir. May you find bright moments. You have given one to me today.
One tool for deep gardening to get a measure of control over the deep roots of right wing terrorism is reinstatement of a Fairness Doctrine that includes social media. Anyone know of an updated version of HR 4401?
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/hr4401/summary
Just a point or two. The Fairness Doctrine applied to over-the-air broadcasting, but not to cable TV networks like CNN or Fox News or OANN. And not to the Internet. And, less important these days, to print media. So reinstating it would not affect them at all.
But it might affect some public radio and TV stations, forcing them to broadcast non-factual counter opinions.
And, would you want an FCC run by a right-wing authoritarian to make decisions about the content distributed over any and all recognizable channels?
I have not heard of a carefully-thought-out replacement.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/11/28/fact-check-fairness-doctrine-applied-broadcast-licenses-not-cable/6439197002/
From the USA Today article:
“The report by the Congressional Research Service notes that broadcast is ‘distinct from cable, satellite, and the Internet, which are all services for which consumers must pay. It does not appear that the Fairness Doctrine may be applied constitutionally to cable or satellite service providers,’ it continues.”
Can someone spell out the constitutional distinction between public versus paid media?
I read recently that the Fairness Doctrine was based on the now-obsolete limitation on the number of airwave channels then available for broadcasting, the reasoning being that since each viewpoint was unable to have its own channel, all the channels must represent each viewpoint. That the broadcasts must be "factual" was an added bonus, possibly included to cut down on the proliferation of viewpoints.
Now, when each person can potentially have their own individualized info feed, the rationale for the Fairness Doctrine is overtaken by technological advance. Frankly, I'm not sure how it would apply to such a distributed network such as the internet anyway. Sad, because we don't seem to be doing a good job, as a society, of maintaining anything resembling informational hygiene.
I don't know if "informational hygiene" is original from you or not but I don't care: I LOVE it!
A key component of the fairness doctrine was to give equal time to opinion. Today, many can no longer distinguish fact, speculation, or opinion...so it’s all interpreted to be facts, which leads to RFDP.
RFDP = ?
Not: Request for Detailed Proposals, Rejected Firearm Deer Permit, or Recreational Fisheries Development Plan!
We have warnings on cigarettes and alcohol “if ur pregnant...”, and carcinogen warnings. It’s not that hard to re imagine the fairness doctrine applied to all media consumption as well is it?
Really F’ing dumb people
LOL thanks!
Surely social media and cable are interstate commerce, and that gets regulated.
I believe the key distinction lies in the fact that we the public "own" the airwaves just like we own those grazing lands leased to ranchers, and therefore we have the right to ask for rent (grazing fees) from them or insist (in case of airwaves) that they not be used for purposes inimical to the public wellbeing.
Did you hear about the tRump administration's replacement of the Voice of America radio system leadership? Replaced with his minions I think. https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/media/michael-pack-voice-america-biden-transition/2020/12/08/8212f630-38e7-11eb-9276-ae0ca72729be_story.html
Yes. Infuriating and sickening, like so much of his reign.
Looks like one focus for the Herd is getting the Fairness Doctrine reinstated. What are the actions we need to take? P.S. Great job this afternoon.
We need to get our collective heads together, to figure out what a Fairness Doctrine would look like on modern technology - cable stations, social media, etc - and how to base it legally so that the result is in fact fairness not a tool for propaganda.
We need to write/call our Congress people, regardless of who they are, to advance our views. This can be done even before there are clear ideas on how to proceed, especially if sympathetic congress people will help figure out how to do it. There might actually be a right-left coalition that could be built on this one, but the devil is in the details - we want real fairness, not more lies.
If our Congress people seem hopeless, find someone to run against them who understands the value of what we are proposing.
Once we have some clear ideas, we could form an organized advocacy group to promote them.
Also include what the reprisals for non compliance will be.
Joan, with u 100%
And follow the money.
In a separate thread, HCR reader Kimberly Kennedy posted that the Washington Post settled a $250 million lawsuit by the student portrayed as verbally berating an Omaha tribal elder, in absence of a bigger context.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/24/media/washington-post-sandmann-settlement-lawsuit/index.html
Yep, Dems create a government bureau to judge the factual basis of news and commentary, and then the Republicans win some elections, and crush opposing ideas.
If we have a government bureau deciding factual basis, that is what I meant by a vehicle for propaganda that we don't want. The original Fairness Doctrine worked very well, under both Republican and Democratic administrations. The Republicans canned it while Reagan was president, which cleared the way for wild unchallenged falsehoods on Fox News and the current problems where massive lying about the election is now believed by the majority of Republicans because they have never heard anything else, and a significant number of people assaulted the Capitol based, at least in part, on those beliefs.
1. I don't believe Fox News was ever hampered by the Fairness Doctrine, because Fox News was always a cable and satellite channel--never an over-the-air broadcast station. Think AM and FM radio, and TV channels coming in to TV sets over rabbit ears, or rooftop antennas.
Source: "The Fox News Channel (FNC) is an American basic cable and satellite news television channel...." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Fox_News)
2. A counterexample: "Pravda" means "Truth" in Russian. And, Pravda was the official house organ (mouthpiece) of the government of the Soviet Union.
"As the names of the main Communist newspaper and the main Soviet newspaper, Pravda and Izvestia, meant "the truth" and "the news" respectively, a popular saying was "there's no truth in Pravda and no news in Izvestia".[22] However, though not highly appreciated as an objective and unbiased news source, Pravda was regarded – both by Soviet citizens and by the outside world – as a government mouthpiece and therefore a reliable reflection of the Soviet government's positions on various issues. The publication of an article in Pravda could be taken as indication of a change in Soviet policy or the result of a power struggle in the Soviet leadership, and Western Sovietologists were regularly reading Pravda and paying attention to the most minute details and nuances."
--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pravda#Soviet_period
I for one do not want a government bureaucrat deciding what things we can say, and, in particular, saying that if we say X we must also say Y.
The UK has Ofcom, a licensing bureau that requires news be factual. Though the BBC is far from perfect and has been pushed into contorted shapes since the advent of Brexit-based discourse toxicity, it remains more reliable than nearly anything available in the US.
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/about-ofcom
All right. Do you think the use of social media to flood the country with lies is just fine and dandy? If not, do you like the default condition of it being up to media CEO's to decide what is acceptable? They coddled trump's dangerous lies for a long time, only stopping after the assault on the Capitol. If you think some kind of updated Fairness Doctrine - which worked quite well in its day - is impossible to achieve in a good way, what do you think is the best way to pull this country out of its divided silos?
Both cable news and social media, along with their virtues, have been instruments of pushing this country into extreme ideas and political tribalism. It's a real problem. The point of updating the Fairness Doctrine would be to address that. Do you have some other ideas on how to do it?
The assumption that there is only one opposing viewpoint to any broadcast or piece of published information is misleading. I was on the debate team in high school. Each year there was a single proposition to be debated in the entire league. Debate teams did not find out whether they would debate the positive or the negative in a round of debating until five minutes before the round began. Consequently each team prepared a case supporting the affirmative as well as several cases for the negative, each of these exploring a different point of view on the proposition and offering a different alternative in place of it.
Thank you. It’s useful too have something concrete. Perhaps the herd, or some members thereof, can get organized around this and press their representatives to get this rule reinstated.
OK, go ahead. Re-regulate over-the-air broadcasters. Won't affect Fox News or OANN or any of many, many Internet outlets. And it might force public radio or PBS to broadcast right-wing talking points, keeping us mindful of some disastrous ideas.
The point would be to bring the FD up to date. A difficult task to be sure, but, in good faith, doable.
A consummation devoutly to be wished. But Very Complicated, especially given that there's money to be made in "customer engagement" -- keeping eyeballs and minds connected to your brand so that you can sell advertising -- and personal data -- at higher rates.
Nowadays my information "fix" has to do with checking Twitter -- I have carefully selected who I follow -- as well as many of the more-respected national and local newspapers. And The Bulwark, and Axios, and on and on. Lucky thing I'm retired. <grin>
The problem of trumpers violence based on disinformation is clearly escalating, and their information “fix” is consuming disinformation sources like Fox News & Entertainment and QAnon—exclusively, and for some, all day long. We know the more a falsehood is repeated, the more likely it is to be believed. So thinking out loud, drying up the source of their “drug” would be the intention of a new Fairness Doctrine.
But addressing the problem of drug and alcohol addiction has shifted from prohibition to prevention through consumer education. Food for thought.
In part, I hope that "deplatforming" their views will slow the spread of falsehoods. The other part, of course, is that they will seek other, clandestine, avenues of spreading misinformation.
My hope is that good people (there are plenty of us left, alive and kicking) will continue to find and "out" these clandestine networks. I think of the Twitter account @Parlertakes -- still active after Parler itself has been taken down.
More power to them!
We get your point, Bob. Many of us just wish for a way to have a common base of fact and we at least look for ways to get there. And we need to remember unintended consequences of our dreams.
I fear that the right-wingers don't want a common basis in fact. Facts are hard. Unyielding, and tricky. (Example: The days get shorter in November, but due to some oddity in the universe, sunrise is earlier for a time.) It's much more comfortable to believe that you have a More True (if unverifiable) Grasp of "Reality." That you and yours are "smarter than the average bear." That you have special knowledge. Unassailable Verities.
Contempt for others is an easy feeling. Makes people feel superior.
And, getting down to brass tacks and actually striving with someone (a Quaker term, there) to come to a common understanding can take hours, days, weeks, or longer. (Quakers seek guidance from a higher power to do this)
Thanks for your link! I’m wondering if HCR may help to lead a charge? I know that other members of this community have expressed interest in moving some version of the Fairness Doctrine forward.
The next 2 years may be the right time.
Between HCR’s day job and moonlighting, she might be otherwise engaged. But we can lead the charge for moving a new Fairness Doctrine forward.
Thank you to Angela Marie on Facebook for finding HR 4401.
Including the social media would, i would think, necessarily include making them responsible for their content. You thereby open them up for prosecution should the content break the law as well as imposing "fairness" on them. To "be faire" they would need to respond to comments presenting different points of view and denounce "fake facts". Interesting.
The social media would fade out of existence as public forums and force them to change their business model. Not a bad thing!
First thing I do every morning is read HCR’s newsletter on my iPhone. Yet for the first time I noticed a heart at the top so I thought I would “like” this one, surely the best, most historically thorough summation of the right wing movement I’ve read, and for the first time discovered the comments. I usually avoid comment sections since eventually trolls create conflict and debase the conversation, but what a heartening conversation I find here. Thank you for your insightful comments and calm, respectful tone.
Isn't it nice Joy? I love this comment section almost as much as the letter itself.
Welcome to the not so underground group of people who enjoy a well grounded discussion.
Welcome Joy! Yes, among the commenters are many who share their knowledge and perspective in a way that both illuminates Heather’s posts and strengthens the bonds of community in a time of such isolation. I, too, am profoundly grateful for the education and comradeship found here.
Couldn’t agree more!
You have taken the words right out of my mouth. As I read this morning’s column, all I could think of was what a concise summation this is of the right wing movement. Isn’t it great to have access to a great historian every morning?
I had the same delightful surprise when sampling the comments section, after subscribing. It is the embodiment of what I envisioned for the Internet long ago, a vehicle for constructive exchange of ideas, but never saw until now. Thank you Heather and friends!
Welcome! Trolls are NOT welcome, and are sifted out for us. Most insightful and calming gift I give myself every day!
Right wing voters have strained at a socialist gnat and swallowed a fascist camel.
Well put.
Walden Bello has the broad perspective that answers a lot of contradictions. Recent piece on FPIF - Foreign policy in focus - is tops.
Should we lobby to bring back the Fairness Doctrine?
ABSOLUTELY! I am going into a medical procedure this month, but after that, I am going to do what I can: start petitions, blog posts, Letters to Editors. I see NO greater issue at this time. Even the Coronavirus is secondary; why? because IT WAS ALSO affected by Fake News.
Yes! Is there another way to get rid of the lying at Fox, talk radio??
YES.
Absolutely!
YES YES YES
We need a Stacy Abrams/FairFight leader!
Yes, but it’s complicated. See separate thread in here.
YES!
Thanx again Prof, for the history lesson, much of it spanning my or my parents’ lifetime. I lived thru the prejudice of the “Welfare Cadillac” perception that black ppl on assistance could afford a uselessly expensive ride. No one seemed to notice the GM Executives where those Caddies were made getting inflated salaries plus bonuses far in excess of most workers annual salary.
Fact is, I was raised white, middle class. My Great Depression era parents’ left inner city St. Louis for the ‘burbs. I also attended an integrated high school and learned that black teens were the same as white teens. This continued in my military service where black & white men lived, ate, showered and worked together and I sometimes had a black sergeant supervising me.
Then, in the late ‘60s I turned on, tuned in & dropped out. Me, the white middle class young man now living in rundown inner city apartments with other slackers of both races. Trouble is, we did work for the most part. I never took any government assistance, and aside from the times of travel I worked for minimum wages usually 48 hours a week, saving money for the next trip. Yet, ppl saw me as a lazy Hippie. Profiled by my shoulder length hair and beard as a non-contributing member of society.
But, I was Leftist Working Class American, the same as most of those Right Wing Nuts who tried to overthrow the government last week. The only difference is one of perception; of being able to think critically and weigh Liberty against Responsibility. The ignorant tRump cultists don’t seem to realize that total liberty without a sense of responsibility is anarchy.
Rob, I appreciate your unifying Liberty with Responsibility. Perhaps, we are all responsible to the American Family, and the Human Family.
Dear Professor Heather Cox Richardson,
I'm a retired 5th and 6th grade public school teacher in California's Central Valley. In the years I was a teacher, 1981-2017, I witnessed a marked decline in the time and support we were allocated for teaching social studies. In 1983, A Nation at Risk ushered in increasing emphasis on standards, high stakes testing, and accountability. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act became No Child Left Behind and then Race to the Top. Standards in reading, language, and math drove our curriculum, and since social studies wasn't tested in every grade, teachers were discouraged, sometimes mandated, by administrators to skip it. At the same time, state-adopted social studies texts (which most teachers didn't find time to use) became more narrowly focused on the glorious rich white founding fathers and the courageous white male explorers and pioneers, etc. I did my best to teach a more balanced and representative social studies anyway through reading and language arts by using my own materials and projects (including research reports and presentations on one Native American tribe per student and another on an historic American woman) but it still greatly concerns me that our public school system doesn't prioritize the teaching and learning of social studies. Is this to some extent deliberate, do you think?
Thank you for your daily letters and twice-weekly talks. I'm learning so much from you, and I'm fascinated and deeply grateful.
Sincerely,
Linda Scheller
I, sadly, think you nailed it.
Back in 2012 I taught in a Maine High School transitioning to so-called state of the art computer-based grading/curricular programming. Frankenstein-esque in a number of ways, its adoption meant high school students would only need two years of social studies for graduation. Part of the ironically named proficiency-based education movement, it seemed the opposite to me.
I've been suspicious of the for-profit privatization of curricula since the late 70s when school systems dropped the term history and switched to social studies. Texas and the textbook scandals led the way. Now it's Pearson et al.
Have worked hard to avoid complicity in these plans and it has meant near disaster for my financial future. Certified to teach in three states, I would love to return to the classroom post #COVID19. Commitment to broad humanities curricula in a public high school has proved close to impossible to find, though.
I like your timeline leading us from reconstruction to today and the breakdown of the intent behind those who fear “socialism”.
I was also fascinated by your assessment of today’s tRump followers as not being cult members but rather the recipients of PsyOps. That really rings true, as I have felt that we’ve been led into this sharp division we are in today intentionally.
Thank you for your work.
The notion of PsyOps also brings to mind the author of the operation. Who he? The obvious answer would be Vladimir Putin but there doesn't have to be only one answer.
Plant the seeds, water the garden
3 days, 9 hours, 38 minutes, 45 seconds
until Wednesday, January 20, 2021 at 12:00:00 noon (Washington DC, District of Columbia)
Thank, Prof. Richardson, For me, this was the most relevant for understanding this time of all your letters. Now the sequel is what we do about it. Bringing back the Fairness Doctrine sounds important. My main fear tonight is the one-party rule coupled with the will to use violence. For me, January 6th was the tip of the iceberg. We are on the U.S. Titanic and one part of the Right Wing Extremist Iceberg has just ripped one of the compartments of our vessel -- the institution of the Congress. The other compartments/institutions have been weakened and could soon follow. The safety net life rafts are too few based on a stupid regulation that based the number of life rafts on the size of the ship rather than the number of passengers like not using science in a pandemic. More life rafts weren't needed because the multiple water-tight compartments meant it was unlikely to sink. The life rafts that did get used were not filled to capacity because they didn't think the mechanism that lowered the rafts into the water would collapse. However, there may be some hope with the U.S. Democracy, the new administration, if there is still time. Too many passengers/citizens are totally unaware of how dangerous a time this is. Gerrymandering, voter suppression are taking us toward one-party rule. We are an oligarchic kleptocracy now; the U.S. Democracy may not get here in time to save so many from a watery grave while the band plays Nearer, My God, to Thee. The insurgents were singing the national anthem to show their patriotism.
https://www.historyonthenet.com/the-titanic-lifeboats
Thank you for highlighting the key role that Rush Limbaugh plays in our current dysfunction. That is a point that I have long made. He has helped radicalize millions with his anti-government rhetoric. Without him, there’s no Fox News, no Sean Hannity, no Tucker Carlson, etc., etc. In particular, his mainstreaming of the despicable term “feminazi” has always infuriated me beyond belief. It both demeans the Feminist movement (which is its goal) and at the same time whitewashes the true evil that was the Nazi party.
Many of the current MAGA mob refer to Trump as "my president", as in "mein fuhrer". There is also a lot of references to Trump being "God's choice" and so on.
A purely political leader of the government has been adopted as a spritual leader to whom many have ceded control of their lives, as people did with Jim Jones, David Koresh, and other messianic cult leaders. These people put themselves beyond discussion, debate, reasoning, and compromise; the essential elements of a free, democratic, self-governing society. They habitate a world impervious to doubt. The problem now is that there are millions of them.
I agree with HCR that this has been part of our body politic from the beginning. The Pilgrims didn't here come to escape religeous intolerance, they came to institutionalize it.