Today the House of Representatives approved awarding Congressional Gold Medals to members of the Capitol Police for their defense of the Capitol on January 6.
Had the mob killed Pence and Pelosi and junked the electoral college votes of a few states, the congress by state would have voted, state by state, one vote each. Trump would have claimed four more years. Riots would have brought Martial Law. Flynn and Flynn were prepared. Trump planned this.
We were close. Fascism was winning. And the big lie of the GOP threatens still.
People adjacent to Trump helped to set up the conditions to make that insurrectionist riot happen. Trump might be shrewd about a few things, like self-promotion, but generally he relies on others to have ideas to present to him. He’s not really that smart, and he is not really a planner or and executor.
I don't know if it were really Trump's plan. I suspect Miller and Flynn. trump would have been completely happy with it, though, and I expect he knew about it.
I am still traumatized by how close we came to losing our democracy. I will never have any use or respect for anyone who supported the former WH occupant or still supports him and the GQP.
Flynn and Flynn, tRump, Jerrod and Miller planned this with Putin pulling puppet strings. The Republican Party is now splitting in two: the GOP and the Russian Party.
It really discombobulates me that there are people, who are either as dumb as a dingo’s dung, or prepared to ignore reality for some inconsistent or opaque goal, that could overturn thousands of years of human endeavour. Why? What do they gain? How do they see that playing out? This is the question that keeps me awake at night. What’s wrong with people having equality and equity? What’s wrong with us all living happily together? What’s wrong with trusting our neighbours? With having no fear? Whats wrong with the family down the road having health cover? Why deny science? Why do they want humanity to go back to no dentistry, no anti-biotics, no anaesthetic, dying of a scratch or a rotten tooth. I just don’t get it
If I were to answer that question with two words I would say abortion and socialism. I am aghast at how many people define socialism as taking all their money away and giving it to people who are too lazy to work. As for me, I’d like to give it a shot. Capitalism is a fail. What’s the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Let’s Move on.
I strongly agree that Capitalism is an abject failure. When we fail to take care of the poorest and most vulnerable among us, we are left with nothing to brag about.
Be careful with this line of thought, common with those who have given up on American democracy, which to this day is a "work in progress." America's adversaries, while themselves often adopting Capitalism, use it to attack us.
No. Democracies can exist with economic systems other than our brand of capitalism. That's probably where we are heading. It works in Scandinavia. But that doesn't stop others, specifically the Russians , from seeing the flaws of our democracy as evidence of the failure of capitalism and using it to tout their brand of "democracy," which isn't even "democracy."
I wish I agreed that we are headed in that direction. Unfortunately, we have institutionalized the idea that money is power and as long as that controls who gets elected and which laws get passed, capitalism is here to stay.
Capitalism isn't a failure - Democraciy's role in defining, regulating, and guiding "free" enterprise has failed in America. We have allowed a ride'em cowboy business mentality. Capitalism is an economic model. Democracy is a government model. Socialism (the word) has been painted as communism-lite by the far right, and saving grace by the far left. To my mind, socialism is both economic and government model, which can eventually smother the initiative, creativity, and innovation that actually make America "great." Democracy's job is to assure that both business and citizens have level playing fields, support and infrastructure, but to do that, democracy must have fair elections, uncorrupted government and enforceable regulations, with a free but honest press.
MaryPat, Smart systems borrow or adapt features from others: Social Security, Unemployment Insurance, Medicare, Medicare, Veterans Benefits... They're not smothering, stunting, etc.
True. But I don't think of any of them as "Socialism" as defined by the "conservatives" who tried to demolish FDR's New Deal. I think of them as essential safety nets created by a democracy (We, the People, All of Us This Time) for a capitalistic economy. I am 100% for our democracy government to pay for ALL healthcare and education and other programs that FREE business enterprise to take risks, be innovative, create good products and services, and hire
well educated and trained folks at good (if not great) wages. Then We the People (which includes veterans, CEOs, the disabled, POC, workers, teachers, moms at home with kids...) fairly elect leaders who make sure that taxes are fair and appropriate, no one company monopolizes a market, the stock market isn't a cheater's poker game, and there are ratios for CEO to worker salaries so trillonaires can't buy our government. It will always be a game of balance. By taking the word "socialism" out of the discussion, we can serve both the people and the ideals of capitalism.
Thanks. It is fellow HCR fan Frederick's concept of "Democracy Capitalism." He is fleshing it out for an article, so, if it is okay with you, I will forward your responses with mine to him.
I dunno. Capitalism inevitably leads to the means of production being divorced from where the money flows (which, in our perverted governmental system also influences how power is wielded). Perhaps we need a new name for an economic system which rewards innovation while ensuring the well-being of all persons within that system. (I agree that the word socialism has become somewhat toxic, though that toxicity is an invention of the right). But at this point we are so very far away from that ideal that I think it's perfectly fair to say that capitalism has failed. Were you hired to do a job and did it as poorly as capitalism has, you would have been unemployed for centuries.
Reid, I think that we are for the most part in sync. A country's history, population characteristics, natural resources, neighbors, etc., go into the understanding of one's own social system as well other's, in addition to knowing how they are actually effecting the people. It is a are rather cumbersome and difficult equation. Learning this and being able to make in-depth comparisons is also dependent on the age, education, experience., receptiveness of the learner as well as the ability of the teacher. Sometimes small and clear steps, along with appropriate examples fuel good communication.
Yes, I suspect we have the same motives. My concern, though, is that the incrementalism of the kind of educative change you speak of is too damn slow for the mess we are in. In order for us to survive on this planet, we need nothing short of a revolution. Capitalism is also running our environmental response (and the whole world's) and we will die before people wise up. The deaths will be gruesome and cause great suffering. This is already happening, of course, and the pain will only increase. Thankfully I will be dead before the worst of it, but it is painful to contemplate the world we are leaving our grandchildren. We can lay this directly at the feet of capitalism.
Not everyone thinks the same way. Most people do not like change. One book that helped me get comfortable with some of the questions we have all struggled with is “The Righteous Mind” by Jonathan Haidt. It is a must read for our time. It has opened my mind to people who think differently than I do.
They've been convinced -- for many generations going back to the Founding -- that society is a zero-sum game. Whatever Black, brown, Muslim, gay, lesbian, trans, etc., etc., etc., people gain, must be something that white people have lost. In particular, political power and financial power. How do we break that evil spell? By doing what Joe Biden and congressional Democrats are doing now--improving the lives of all Americans, not just the wealthy.
I've been pushing this for a very long time: the attempt to explain to white supremacists that it is NOT a zero sum game is countered by their preachers, their media outlets, their elected representatives (who say blatantly that "politics" is a zero sum game) who are interested only in power not in governing and legislating. It has not worked so far. The spell will not be broken in 4 short years--of which we have, maybe, two before it gets really, really nasty.
Yes! This. We have to understand that we are in the trenches NOW. We have two years to put policies in place that will convince a sufficient number of people that government has the potential to do good, both in the world and for them as individuals. That's why the Biden plan to pass meaningful legislation through reconciliation and then sell the crap out of it, is exactly the right approach.
It’s time to recognize what science has taught us: that the term “race” has been twisted and used to abuse people. The USA is a “mass” culture, consisting of many “subcultures” each of which consist of people of many colors. There are no pure white or pure black pepper. There are only Americans of various subcultures. Why are so many people so thick headed about superficial appearances, when character and personality are so much more important !
It serves certain of the elite to keep the pot stirred, so they can continue to have money and power and to pretend that their rapaciousness is not a problem for others or the planet.
They still think that it will disserve others more than them, the same story told to poor white trash so that they would support the "Plantation Elite" rather than naturally joining with the non-wage slaves to make their voices heard.
Oh, I agree, but when you live in a gated community and have loads of money and probably houses everywhere, you think you can escape. And everyone else should sacrifice, so that you can maintain your life style. Right now here in Oregon, we have some houses on the coast about to fall into the ocean and the rule is no rip rap, etc. to help your situation. But the owners are trying to get the rules that helps to not move the problem elsewhere, changed. Or pollution caused by industry, let's locate near poor (preferably POC) neighborhoods. And on it goes as it has since the agricultural revolution.
Diana, there is a terrific but little known speech given in 1838 by Abraham Lincoln early in his career to the Young Men’s Lyceum in Springfield, Illinois. In it, he warns that there are men of deep and profound personal ambition, who would deprive Americans of theit freedom just to fulfill that ambition. Sometimes people would “overturn thousands of years of human endeavor” just to make their mark.
Lincoln notes, “Many great and good men sufficiently qualified for any task they should undertake, may ever be found, whose ambition would aspire to nothing beyond a seat in Congress, , a gubernatorial or a presidential chair, but such belong not to the family of the lion, or the tribe of the eagle....Towering genius disdains a beaten path. It seeks regions hitherto unexplored. It sees no distinction in adding story to story, upon the monuments of fame erected to others. It denies that it is glory enough to serve under any chief. It scorns to tread in the footsteps of any predecessor, however illustrious. It thirsts and burns for distinction, and if possible it will have it, whether at the expense of emancipating slaves, or enslaving freemen. Is it unreasonable, then, to expect, that some man possessed of the loftiest genius, coupled with ambition sufficient to to push it to utmost stretch, will at some time spring up among us? And when such a one does, it will require the people to be united with each other, attached to the government and laws, amd generally intelligent, to successfully frustrate his designs.”
One sees no signs of such a person yet, but that does not mean there are not people who do not see themselves in this way. Lincoln stressed the importance of unity among Americans to counter such a person’s effort. 30 years ago, I would have said that Americans were sufficiently united to do so. But look what a con artist like Trump accomplished despite his incompetence. And it may be that there are people like Charlie Koch who have such ambition but are content to go to their grave knowing that they have brought low what was once great. Certainly we now know there are dime-a-dozen politicians willing to sell themselves and the well-being of their nation out for the 30 pieces of silver it takes to remain in power.
There are certainly enough towering egos among congressional Republicans thirsting for distinction. We need to keep pulling the rug out from under them, least they gain traction.
Thank you Kenrick. A powerful Lincoln quote that deserves wider prominence. But then, it's hard to go wrong quoting Lincoln. As Edwin Stanton said, "he belongs to the ages now."
I would say that we have seen such a foul figure: the Twice-Impeached, minus the genius. But he won't be the last.
For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Mark 8:36. The moral choices we make feed our souls but if those choices only benefit our own needs then our souls wither. How do you turn someones gaze to the light when they are transfixed on self indulgent goals with an fixed attitude that negates the rights of others? One day at a time, one incident at a time, one choice at a time.
And there there is the maintenance of the caste system to keep them profitable and powerful. Basically, slavery mentality. Narcissism and self-aggrandizement thwart consciousness, conscience and compassion for others.
I tried to raise my kids to always be kind (like Fred). My son died in 1999 at the age of 16 in a car crash. He had 10 Catholic priests con celebrate his funeral mass, which usually doesn't happen for the 'average Joe'. But what resonated most deeply with me was when many years later, a woman told me that on the day my son died, her son, who was bullied, told her my son was the only one who had ever defended him from the bullies. Fred Rogers was a treasure and I think my son must have been one too. Kindness and love matter.
And the older I get, the more I realize that very little else matters much at all. If we were all kind and loving all the time, all other problems would be solved. Are you familiar with this Aldous Huxley quote? It's one of my favorites. "It is a bit embarrassing to have been concerned with the human problem all one's life and find at the end that one has no more to offer by way of advice than, 'Try to be a little kinder.'"
I am so sorry to hear about your son's death. Mine is 38 and I grieve when he has a hangnail. It is hard for me to fathom how I would feel if he were no longer here.
Reid... I forgot to say my son was born at Swedish Hospital. And he was able to visit Seattle before he died. He loved it. He was so proud to be born there. His first tattoo was going to be a Space needle with the letters M I S (made in Seattle)!
Their top priority is the preservation of their advantages over Americans with non-European ancestors. They are willing to give up many comforts as long as they maintain some of those advantages. Ezra Klein’s book on polarization has convincing and well-documented explanations of why.
Love your use of alliteration! "Dumb as a dingo's dung" and all of those words beginning with the letter "W." You're close to "getting it" when you say they are prepared to "ignore reality."
Differing circumstances of people's childhood and adolescent years play a big role in determining their adult politics. If a person grows up in a benevolent family, trustworthy friends and a safe neighborhood, that person is more likely to behave humanistically. By contrast someone subjected to abuse or neglect by parents, and for whom a walk in the neighborhood might be dangerous because of bullies or gangs, is likely to see the world as a rough game in which people must continually defend themselves from others. These contrasting childhood situations lead to different politics, different behavior and different morals. Racism and cruelty are but two of the consequences.
I figure that many of the Republicans must have been Russian operatives. The list of all the things the Russian operatives did corresponds to what the Republicans were saying.
In Stephen Colbert's monologue tonight he mentioned T giving Jim Jordan et al medals for service to their country, adding that it would be nice if that country were the US.
I dunno, what about Rudy man? If Jordan gets a meal, Rudy has to get the Championship belt. I mean how Pro Russia and dumb is ole Rudy? Taking "security/anti terrorism consulting" fees paid by Russian backed Oligarchs instead of the Eastern Ukrainian/Russian border town he was supposed to be consulting to? The Ukrainian town is being occupied by the Russian Military. But the town didn't cut his check, the local oligarch did! Once you get him to take that money, you can get him to do ANYTHING for you. Garland's gonna light Rudy up!
I'd almost forgotten about Drooliani. The last I saw, he was melting like a wicked witch. Nothing beyond that except for a little incitement of insurrection on Jan 6.
As a former New Yorker I can tell you that most New Yorkers really hated Giuliani and he made himself "loved" the same way Cuomo has done: by being more competent in the face of crisis than the guy in the White House. He was also a sexual harasser and predator (like Cuomo and Drumpf). His "clean up" of Times Square merely pushed the problem into communities of color, which he consistently underfunded. Public education in NYC took a nose dive except for those schools with large white populations. He was enthusiastic about the destruction of neighborhoods with small-scale housing in favor of building enormous high-rise luxury condos that pushed working class people out. NYC was barely affordable when I was living there. It was untenable--except in the outer boroughs--after Giuliani. And there was a real disgust of him when he tried to parlay his "American's Mayor" nonsense into a presidential run.
Rudy has big alimony payments to make and Watch for his watch and cufflinks. The guy's greed for material wants has put him in debt/fear of debt. That is exactly the target foreign intelligence is on the look out for. Combine that with what we saw in Sasha Baren Cohen's film, and well you get the idea. A former US Attorney, Former Mayor of NYC, is now a 'Useful Idiot".
I may have spent too much time working for an association for mental-health professionals, but I've wondered if Rudy has some cognitive issue going on. Maybe I just want an explanation for his behavior, though
People rarely change that drastically. Like the racist element in the world, he was just swimming underwater until a fellow scum gave him opportunity to surface. (No disrespect to underwater scum).
Ivan Ilyn was the father/founder of "Christian Fascism" and Putin's #1 philosophical influence. Ilyn became a proponent anti revolutionary/ "counter Revolutionary by any means necessary"....seem familiar to Jan 6th? When we talk marketing, influence, running a campaign, propaganda, or Active Measures, those are investments to protect the larger golden egg. I don't think people really understand how much wealth has been stolen by the Russian Oligarchs and Putin. "To hold onto that wealth they had to export it."-Snyder. Then they must buy influence (corrupt politicians) to protect it. How do you corrupt American Politicians? just donate to their campaigns via dark money Pacs, if you cant hide enough, then pass Citizens United and make it legal. And where are all those BILLIONS? or maybe close to a trillion now? Where is all that laundered money? I think Merrick Garland could go down as the #1 cop of all time. This is bigger than Theodore Roosevelt breaking up the trusts. Garland's gonna be THE GOAT!
"I don't think people really understand how much wealth has been stolen by the Russian Oligarchs and Putin. "To hold onto that wealth they had to export it."-Snyder. Then they must buy influence (corrupt politicians) to protect it." OH. Now it all makes terrifying sense.
"Human sexuality is an inexhaustible raw material for the manufacture of anxiety" Ivan Ilyn took psycho analysis from Freud. Literally, in Freuds office! History freakin' rocks!
"In power, eternity politicians manufacture crisis and manipulate the resultant emotion. To distract from their inability or unwillingness to reform, they instruct their citizens to experience elation and outrage at short intervals, drowning the future in the present." Does that sound like the Republican Party since 1980?
Very, very short intervals, like advertising or sponsor's messaging on DT's flickering telescreen.
Messages often contradictory, to induce and maximize hypnotic confusion. Thus, the Messenger occupies all mental space and the cascade of meaningless messages transforms Messenger into Message.
The Fuehrer, the Duce, the One and Only Message.
The technique was developed in the 1930s by Hitler and Goebbels. It worked. As we have seen, it still works.
King Cobra hypnotizes the mass of his victims and feeds at will.
I know that criticism of America is unpopular, especially when it comes from furriners. As I observed in Russia, it's fine when Russians criticize their politicians, not when outsiders say the same thing. I sympathize. Yet, we must all address our blind spots. Especially the powerful. Or else superpowers risk becoming too superpowerful for their own good or anyone else's.
Like it or not we all share this magnificent blue orb hurtling through space. Our ultimate survival is a shared responsibility. We learn to coexist or we cease to exist.
HCR and Snyder really need to get together for coffee. HCR is so clear on our history. Snyder is so clear on Russian and Eastern Europe history. They go together like chocolate and peanut butter!
There's only one thing I am not at ease with in America's old messaging system, still that of the Democratic Party machine: the catchwords "RUSSIA/RUSSIAN".
Too much like Putin's and every tinpot dictator's code word for THE ENEMY. Yes, the eternal enemy. The inhuman, subhuman, Satanic adversary.
Bear in mind, please, if the 45th president had won (or grabbed) a second term, this is what the words AMERICA/AMERICANS would have become, indelibly, in the mind of the rest of the world: THE ENEMY.
This kind of identification is dangerous.
Of course, the "Russian Party" is not new (any more than American parties in various countries). It wasn't just "the Commies". It was Catherine the Greatest Russian Party in the Polish Sejm... And now, in Congress.
Can we not stop this pernicious business of identifiying entire peoples with their rulers? Especially when those rulers are a bunch of fascistic brigands in uniform.
Let it be "PUTIN or THE PUTIN REGIME".
Especially at this moment in time when President Biden has undiplomatically called a spade a spade.
One final comment on Timothy Snyder's pièce in the Guardian. I a m generally a keen reader of his excellent and important work.
But there's one thing he fails to mention here: the American share in responsibility for the failed reintegration of Russia and the former Soviet republics into a more convivial world order.
This was not always the work of US Administrations, but of other NeoCon free radicals, kicking Russia (fixed in many rock-solid minds as the Eternal Enemy) when she was down, visiting humiliation upon humiliation on people already humiliated.
Whether in the Kremlin or Washington, the domineering mindset that needs, that feeds on the identification of "enemies" to exist... is a built-in threat to peace. As is the doctrine of sole US hegemony that goes with it. The doctrine that dictated the gratuitous humiliation of the defeated "enemy".
A doctrine like that which transformed the defeat of Germany and Austria-Hungary into the Nazi Blitzkrieg twenty years later.
A doctrine that did much to spawn Putin's foul regime... like Mussolini's Salo Republic, a concentrate of viciousness teetering on the edge of implosion. A beast at bay.
"Can we not stop this pernicious business of identifying entire peoples with their rulers?"
Well said, Peter. After all, do we want the rest of the world blaming all Americans for Trump's regime? But back to Russia. The Russian people have suffered immeasurably throughout so much of their history, and further abuse of them makes no sense at all. To closely paraphrase President FDR's statement during WWII, "The American people will be ETERNALLY (my caps) grateful to the Russian people for their sacrifices in this war..." To start with, 26 million Russians were killed in the struggle against fascism. They were a major ally of ours in that fight. If U.S. leadership and the state department were interested in healthy relations with Russia, they would start that new world with reference to our serious bond in WWII.
I'm saying that as the son of a naval officer who had the thankless task of escorting the Russian convoys to Murmansk and Archangel during the war... Dangerous and thankless.
But we all owe so much to people like the citizens of Leningrad, who met with Stalin's wrath after the war for surviving and overcoming without his help.
Heydon, It is not as though little has happened since WWII. Neither country is exempt from meddling with other countries, to put it mildly. We are not now cooperating nations in wartime, and it looks like you have left Putin out. Have you, perhaps, posited a backward looking position?
"Can we not stop this pernicious business of identifiying entire peoples with their rulers? Especially when those rulers are a bunch of fascistic brigands in uniform.”
Far easier said than done. As the saying goes, a people gets the leaders it deserves. Germany got Hitler because enough Germans were willing to bracket off their conscience and their humanity to ensure his power. We need to be alert because we ourselves may be, collectively, coming close.
The reply I was writing seems to have been lost, but it was just to say that we, all of us and our world, get what we deserve, and that places an immense responsibility on those who hold the greatest power. America's errors and failings are immensely costly.
We have, however, seen plenty of gross irresponsibility in recent years, or, at its most caricatural, responsibility limited to quarterly returns to shareholders...
Western Europe got the Marshall Plan, Russia got kicked when she was down. And the Russians are still being beaten every time they show any sign of independent life. Would this brutal police state be in place if America had acted more intelligently?
Let's never forget that the Russian economy is actually smaller than that of France. Government revenues are totally dominated by Oil royalties like any under-developed 3rd world country. What is appalling is the percentage of that resource, like in the US that goes to the military.....they have the excuse of being a "dictatorship"! Snyder's thesis is important as only by being able to portray foreign ventures as defensive reactions to US aggressivity can Putin and his system survive...in Russia.
Its estimated Putin has a net worth of over 200 billion stashed away. That's just his..one man with personal accounts of over 200 B! The oligarchs pay Putin royalties from their respective industries to maintain their lifestyles and power. Its obscene. I wonder if the money they steal from the Russian people every year is greater than their annual defense budget. A percentage of that money was spent on the Brexit campaign, in Austria, Hungry, and Poland, Italy, Germany, and France, and now here in America. Ukraine tried to break away and join the EU, so the Russians Invaded. Putin has the personal resources to continue influence operations for decades. IT is how he buys the political protection for laundering and holding his cash, real estate, who knows what assets are out there. It is but one reason DT discredits our Justice Dept, Intel Agencies and FBI. There is going to be a huge reckoning.
How the South won and Wounded Knee & the road to unfreedom have so many of the same lessons. It’s enlightening! Both books Reinforce each other like concrete and rebar.
Snyder's book on the Holocaust is "Black Earth: The Holocaust as History and Warning" and the one on 20th C. Eastern Europe is "Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin."
Nothing particularly new unfortunately. The first government that Françoise Mitterand put together in 1981 was found later to have been totally penetrated by then USSR influence. I seem to remember a report afterwards saying that everyone of his cabinet had received Russian and Communist Party financing in one shape or form.....and most ended up in front of a judge for corruption too! A very unhappy period which has left a lasting legacy in France affecting "permissable" political thought and shifting the goalposts for the last 40 years.
Just a hint about the career of this first "socialist" President of the 5th French Republic François Mitterand.....Junior Minister in the fascist, Hitler collaborating Petain wat-time government.....Minister of Defense who signed the permission for torture by the French Army in Algerian "Civil War"and arch-destroyer of the 4th Republic......Brought the Socialists and Communists to power as elected President of the 5th Republic..........and you call that a democrat? More a highly intellectual, organized pre-Trump!
In England too! But here having a mistress was part of the macho mystique. The mistress was one of the top people at the Musée d'Orsay and lived with her daughter in the Presidential Palace at public expense...while the guy's wife didn't and without public knowledge as the press were complicit in protecting politicians "privacy" .
Stuart, usually your comments seem to be your own, even when—like all the rest of us—you’ve thought matters through and freely espoused someone else's views because they correspond to your own. And there's not necessarily the shadow of a prejudice in all that. But here it does all sound like predigested opinion handed down to you by someone else, friends or family? (In this connection, I'd be interested to know how you see General de Gaulle in particular, and other major 20th century French politicians.)
I don't have an axe to grind here—I have never had any party affiliation, but I have spent most of a lifetime observing politics, often from quite close quarters. One thing I learned from this is to put aside my likes and dislikes and recognize ability. I don't know about you, but I was spending quite a bit of my time in Paris when Mitterrand came to power. Like Charles de Gaulle, the man was too big to be likeable, too much the republican monarch—shades of Louis XI, when it wasn't Louis XIV. Like General de Gaulle, he attracted much bitter hatred—maybe more of that than admiration. I remember one of my dearest friends, a deeply anti-Communist woman of ninety, speaking of him as though he were the devil incarnate!
I'd be interested to know your documentation on Soviet penetration—not forgetting the extent of this throughout western Europe or how it did for one of the ablest statesmen of the postwar period, Willi Brandt—but Mitterrand must have been one of the most genuinely Machiavellian politicians since Napoleon. And the most notable aspect of his relation with the French Communist Party was how he invited it into his initial coalition government like the witch inviting Hansel and Gretel into her house... and utterly destroyed it. No mean feat—the PCF had been a massive and seemingly permanent feature of the French political scene since the war. They, too, were Machiavellian, and I learned quite a bit about politics from observing their activities as a very young student in Paris in 1958.
The misfortune is that the Joker in the post-Communist pack has been Jean-Marie and Marine Le Pen and the far-Right—France’s new “Russian party”.
Here, I’d just like to note a personal observation that I cannot prove because my reasoning is too inductive, but regardless of Soviet moles in the network, it has always seemed to me that the US services paid close attention to rising talent in the non-Communist Left throughout Europe. This is rational enough. No need to waste too much time on well-established conservative allies, rather to help displace Soviet influence by promoting Socialists and Social-Democrats. It seems probable to me that members of Mitterrand’s government (maybe the man himself) will have been courted by both KGB and CIA… Hence, perhaps, the stains on some reputations.
I did not “like” either Mitterrand or Thatcher, and while I did not dislike Helmut Kohl, I never forgot Brandt wiping the floor with him in debate as a younger man. But the disastrous decline in political standards comes after these major figures, just as, in America, it comes AFTER Richard Nixon. If we’re looking for a leader comparable to Mitterrand in US politics, it might be Lyndon Johnson. Mitterrand avoided involvement in the Yugoslav wars, doubtless remembering LBJ’s albatross. And the only leader who got the full measure of that horror and would have been willing to act against it was Thatcher, sidelined and replaced by… shall I be polite?... lesser figures.
Thanks for your thoughts, Peter. I agree with a great deal of what you have written. My experience of Mitterand is firstly based on 25 years living in Paris and prior to that 25 years living in Montreal in an "exiled" french family where discussion of French politics was "de rigeur"....and mostly on the left à la Nouvels Obs! My opinions have been developed over that time, like yours, from personal observation, reading and discussion with others. The part that others shared concerning Mitterand was mixed early in that period but as his true character and political contribution became clearer much less so and the conclusions....other than in the militant socialist's eyes...are far from elogiac concerning either the person or his impact. That he thought that he was a great statesman in the image of Talleyrand and with a bow to Macchiavelli is obvious....and all accept that he was extremely intelligent and cultivated. The reality however tended to confirm that he used his skills strictly for his own glorification...and when he felt like lying to the French public, he could give Trump etc a few lessons.
The differences that I would underline, in my opinion...never sufficiently humble i admit...with De Gaulle is that De Gaulle was called to the job "to save the nation" twice, knew that his character, role and position were macchiavellian.....and Napoleonesque....but he used his skills strictly for the people and considered that the people were the only source of legitimacy. There have been a couple of TV series/films on him recently which are very good and close to reality about the man and the role he played.
On the question of Soviet penetration...my sources were vague memories, newspaper reports at the time and subsequent interviews with people like Hubert Vedrine and other "intelligent" french foreign ministers since...not a crowd I must admit and not necessarily certain sources. This element, as you point out is not what distinguished this particular group amongst European politicians. The competition with the CIA is of course clear, but less so in France with their tendency towards an innate anti-americanism and the intellectuals adoration of the Communist regimes in the 50s and 60s. However what is now coming out is the close relationship that the CIA had with the French politicians considered to be the founding fathers od European Union; Jean Monet and Robert Schuman.
Mitterand as a French LBJ.....not at all the same spirit nor the desire to nudge, influence and corral others into supporting his legislative program. His tactic was distinctly more deadly and his main concern was to maintain dominance of the Socialist Party while crushin,g the Communists (these being already significantly weakened after the failures of George Marchais). You could examine his destruction of Michel Rocard who he named Prime Minister in order to better destroy him and his influence in the Party...or Pierre Beregovoy, another of his PMs who he drove to suicide.
Lastly , on the subject of Le Pen, the putative French "Russian" party you should have a look at Mitterand's introduction of Proportional representation splitting representation of the right and maintaining thus the minority rule of his party. Ever since the "Russian" Party has been diabolized by the left...while politely ignoring similar if opposite extremism from the Hard-Left...maintaining the split in the right preventing a majority take-over of the governmental function.
The result of these games and the increasing dominance of the "intersectional ideologies" on the left has led the working stiff in this country to support the hard-right giving Marina Le Pen a very probable victory in the next presidentials if nothing changes and the present incumbant insists on running again....despite her evident incompetence and being surrounded by some very dubious characters...in 2022.
Thanks for the very helpful conversation. Some of this may seem marginal to immediate American concerns, but if there is one thing that becomes more and more blindingly obvious with every passing year it is interdependence and the paramount importance of relationships at all levels. And how leaders whose legitimacy is grounded in humane values and the rule of law are to defend and strengthen our democratic institutions from the wild beasts at home and abroad -- quite a safari!
For the rest, it will always be good if we get more of an opportunity to talk more about French politics and such characters as Mongénéral, Rocard, Chirac and the heroes of French history like Jaurès and Clemenceau... For me, de Gaulle was quite beyond "like" and "dislike", his heroic certainty, his courage and charisma just blew me away. I was never surprised that Malraux should have taken to him as he did. He'd already described the figure in the person of Colonel Ximénès (that Frenchified spelling!) the Civil Guards officer defending the Spanish Republic in his novel L'Espoir.
Unfortunately, we are again living in an age that calls for heroic courage, great skill and the ability to break free of habits, prejudices and outworn shibboleths. The relationship between the old -- the generation of Biden and Bernie Sanders -- and the young will be essential and education, especiallu civic education, must everywhere be an absolute priority. One hell of a challenge to us all!
In America, one politician I shall be keeping an eye on is Stacey Abrams... But there I bring our detour to an end. Thanks again.
Agreed -- more than agreed. Another of these José Manuel Barroso-type opportunists. But while Mitterrand represented What's-in-it-for-us? there has been a lot of What's-in-it-for-me? since his departure. And then, there's the whole issue of German-Russian, indeed Euro-Russian relations, stymied by the presence of bandits in Moscow... but also by Anglo-American mistrust of the natural potential for developing a community of interests. Germans were always influential in the development of modern Russia. And not just Catherine II.
The conundrum is that Schroeder when Chancellor introduced some much needed reforms to the German economy which confirmed the thought that it takes a Social Democrat to initiate right of center reforms....classic. He gave no hint at the time of the personal economic agenda that he has displayed since. But that said, the orientation of Germany to the East rather than to the West is nothing new. France was the enemy for centuries and much of the UK's foreign policy during the 17-19th centuries was to ensure that it stayed that way....fully occupying them while England ruled the seas and built an industrial revolution and a commercial empire.
Not really operatives, not on the Russian payroll nor being blackmailed. Actually they were what the Russians consider "useful idiots." Many Trumpublicans continue to be ignorant and gullible, and support racist policies as well as far-right conspiracy theories in an effort to undo everything good the United States has accomplished since FDR. This saves the Russians the job of convincing the world that American democracy is a failure. So long as the Republican Party does that job for them, they don't even need "Manchurian" candidates. Acclimated by the former president to accept lies, Republicans can't even identify Russian lies when they repeat them themselves. Yes, "useful idiots."
Of course, they are. Lacking integrity, morals, and/or character they are perfect targets for an intelligence operation. Oh, did I mention their unquenchable need for money to retain 'power'?
Putin’s Russia is an oligarchy. The Republican Party is doing its best to turn the USA into an oligarchy. Its biggest sponsors are oligarchs. They call themselves libertarians but their brand of libertarianism is the politically feasible route to oligarchy. Most Republicans probably aren’t Russian operatives or even “useful idiots,” but they are doing exactly what Putin and his cronies would want them to do. They are totally in synch, whether by collusion, by accident, or — most likely — by lust for money and power. If anything, most Republicans are “useful idiots” doing the bidding of America’s oligarchs and wannabes. Trump is another animal. I’m convinced he is a “useful idiot” or worse.
And have to add Ron Johnson-WI, for lying in order to rewrite history as soon as history happened. That must be something really remarkable for HCR, to be writing history at the same time Ron is lying about it for future historians to get wrong in the future?
I recall someone writing that every person in congress needs to wear the patches of their sponsors, much like the racing culture. That would make it ever so much easier to identify them.
Remember, Putin had his federal agents raided the Amway Moscow office during her reign. It’s no secret the Devos’ have a lot of cash banked in Russia. That’s leverage Putin can put a boot on.
Demonstrating, by the fact the largest single group of them are Texican goat ropers, that Texas *needs* to become "a whole other country." Permanently.
You obviously don't realize how close Texas is to becoming purple and then blue shortly after. The Republicans in Texas are scared sh**less. Of course, it is traditional every two years when the legislature meets that there is a bill to secede.
And Texas has given us Ann Richardson, Molly Ivins and Jim Hightower... While my beloved California has foisted Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Devin Nunes, Daryl Issa, and Kevin McCarthy on the nation. Now if we could get all of those horrid people to go live in their own country, maybe at Mar-o-Largo, ...
Hello Cathy, it's good that you explain things about TX for those of us who are less well-informed. If there's a real chance of 5 Texases, it'd be scary, and possibly upset Dems' new-state strategy. Yet it is so thrilling to contemplate TX politics being as good as the best of its people.
They would have to seriously gerrymander the new state borders to have all the cities in one state thus limiting the democrat Senatorial gain to 2 while the others would hope to haul in the other 8. If there was a city in each them the Democrats might cream all 10. There are however in old statutes imposing population minima for recognition of states; a Lone Star state with only Abbot as resident wouldn't quite cut it.
I really don't think Texas is ready to give up its everything is BIG in Texas attitude. When Alaska became a state and put Texas in second place in size, Texans just replied "wait until the ice melts".
So in my 20’s I was assigned by a temporary agency to transcribe his letters and debates with students and such for only about a month or so. It was interesting to say the least. In one of the debates, I realized what a very clever liar he was. He had to appear that he was right. Many of the letters had to do with attracting and snaring the biggest names in terms of wealth and fame to land at BU or stay there. My stint in that mansion like building was around a Christmas time somewhere in mid 70’s. He was the very soul of diligence.
This is the fuel behind all those bills in the legislature to suppress the vote in Texas and all those desperate speeches that Abbott is making nowadays. They are literally terrified. So much so that the Trump/Pence signs have finally come down in my little town and the MAGAts are in hiding. Not so on the coast though, where a plethora of "F... Biden" signs have flourished.
I think it needs to happen in Texas. The cities are some of largest in the country. Texas has a diversity of population and so many colleges and universities. Austin. And my favorite is Democrat, former Seal commander, chancellor of the TX university system, William McRaven. So I believe it’s possible.
As a native-born Texan with lots of Texan friends, I keep hearing this (I used to hear it from progressives who were going after these scum when they were "Democrats" 50 years ago), have heard it so long that I am no longer going to hold my breath, since anyone who does will be certain to turn blue and die. That said, the bottle of bubbly I will pop when it happens is now so old it should be *really* good.
The Republicans are doing everything they can to slow things down. Beto O'Rourke came so close to unseating Senator Cruz that it really shook the Republicans. I attended a webinar on redistricting in Texas with one of the speaker being the State of Texas Demographer. Over half of the population change since the 2010 census is Hispanic who largely vote Democratic. Bottom line is we all need to support the grass roots movement to help get the For the People Act passed and into law before the 2022 elections! Otherwise we will be an oligarchy kleptocracy with one last election in 2024 to solidify the minority Republican rule. Vote as if this is the last election you'll be allowed to vote in!
My grandfather came to Texas as a boy in a covered wagon at the turn of the 20th century. My dad was born in Texas but I was born in Kansas. My parents, grandparents and great grandparents are all buried in the Old Oakwood Cemetery just one mile from the Texas Capitol building in Austin.
Dear Cathy, your cemetery is lovely, much larger than expected in a downtown historic district. Hopefully you can visit as often as you like. Though none are close, I've been to two of our three family cemeteries. Not Cherry Hill NJ yet; so far, Hudson QC and McKnightstown PA, in the heart of the 1863 Gettysburg campaign.
Actually you should be more frighten that by Treaty with the US when it chose to become a state it may split into as many as five states. Thing of the number of Senators Texas would then have... LOL!
A little history lesson for you. Texas was the Republic of Texas, a sovereign country in its own right from 1836 to 1845 when it decided to join the United States in 1845. So it is the only state that became a state through a Treaty between two nations. Texas has been under six flags:
1 Spain (1519 to 1685; 1690 to 1821)
2 France (1684 to 1690 for Fort Saint Louis and 1800 to 1803 as French Louisiana)
3 Mexico (1821 to 1835)
4 Republic of Texas (1836 to 1845 as the Republic of Texas; since 1845 as the State of Texas)
5 United States of America (1845 to 1861; 1865 to present)
He did indeed, and one has to commend him, having "come up" in the system he did. The Texas "Democratic" Party was composed of the same kind of "southernists" that the Texas "Republican" Party is composed of today. Being a Texas progressive isn't easy - I think of my lawyer back then, whose house was waaaaaaaayyyyyy back from the country road outside of town. When I commented about that, he said "Yes, it's out of range."
Texas would do fine since it is already the 9th largest economy ($1.9 trillion) in the world which is larger than Canada or South Korea. The 15 military bases contribute about $186 billion to its GDP.
Yes and I’m really glad Congress honored the capitol police— they didn’t even have permission to use their guns— and yes that’s good because it would have been a bloodbath—but what they endured was horrendous
It irks me no end that if there were men of color within that crowd, there would have been killings and it would have been deemed ok. And THEN these republicans would have had a different story. It’s so blatantly racist and criminal.
It's time for us to begin stating the obvious: these people and others of their ilk (Hawley, McConnell, Cruz, etc.) need to be removed from office. They do not represent anyone but themselves, their crazed TQP cultists and Putin.
There are statesmen from other mature Democracies that would scoff at the U.S. capitol being called a "temple" of Democracy, but that would be coming from the perspective of witnessing U.S. imperialism interfering in other countries elections. However in Canada, US exceptualism has been identified as the US civic faith, so using the word temple instead of church would make sense.
Regardless of the use of the word chosen, the capitol is the highest symbol of our Democracy. To attack it specifically in orderto interupt the certification of the national vote and the will of the people and the electors, would be reported by democratic news media outside the US as a failed overthrow of the election. It was a planned insurrection to overthrow the Democratic process. If we do not call it that, it is to deny we are a Democracy.
I recall words from a song popular during the Civil War... "We'll finish the Temple of Freedom, and set up an altar within, where all who would worship are welcome, whatever the hue of their skin." That language has historical resonance.
Yes, wonderful words, but a different time in history, and an inclusive message with language that has historical resonance, that may not be as relatable today.
They could have use "highest symbol of our Democracy" or something more contemporary
& inclusive, because words matter.
I can not sing many old songs & hymns because the language is not inclusive. I know we can do better! "We are a Democracy"
Thanks for all the great comments and conversation. I'm learning so much that helps me have constructive, meaningful conversations w friends, family and neighbors💙
While the Republicans rubbed me the wrong way throughout 45's fascist administration, they grate even more offensively now as they reveal their contempt for every act that smacks of decency, valor, and ethical values! Thank you, Dr. HCR, for holding their feet to the fire of truth!
I just hope that substack is storing a copy of all linked pages, so historians later can access them all even though many will no longer be on the web.
The Letters are easy to find and read without a paid subscription. It’s our wonderful community here that we pay to access, as well as to support Dr. Richardson in this worthy endeavor.
I agree completely. There is a similar, much larger, and free community on Facebook as well. But I spend an awful lot of time reading here! I doubt students have that kind of time, even if it would be so good for them.
It took me time after I subscribed to come to the commentary section here. In the before times, I would spend my time reading and replying on Facebook rather than here. I find these conversations much more fulfilling and informative.
Many periodicals, and most academic ones, have far higher institutional subscription prices than for Individuals. LFAA isn't truly academic, but there are a variety of factors to consider with subscriptions.
I keep remembering Fiona Hill's testimony in the first impeachment trial. No one seems to have remembered or commented on that, but I distinctly remember her saying something to the effect that some of her questioners were saying exactly what Russia wanted them to say, that they were peddling Russian talking points. She, of course, put it much better than I just did. But I would love to see someone interview her right now . . .
“Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines declassified the assessment of the intelligence community of foreign threats to the 2020 U.S. federal elections that had been provided to the previous administration and congressional leadership on January 7. The community assessed that Russian President Vladimir Putin authorized influence operations, which “a range of Russian government organizations conducted,” “aimed at denigrating President Biden’s candidacy and the Democratic Party, supporting former President Trump, undermining public confidence in the electoral process, and exacerbating sociopolitical divisions in the U.S.””
Yesterday, the New York Times published an article describing a recent study of the segregation of our neighborhoods along partisan lines. It is an unsettling piece, not least because the corrosive effects of the previous administration and the political philosophy it supported, has taken root so firmly. Russia, Ron Johnson and the Right political establishment generally, if not coordinating their efforts to divide Americans from one another, are at the very least, singing from the same songbook.
What follows is one of the reader comments to the article.
“I am a 71 year old Jewish male living in a suburb of Sacramento County, and in fact in the same community as Governor Newsom who is 2 miles downriver from me. I have lived in my home for 35 years and in the beginning when the homes were built it was a solidly professional yet liberal tract. However over the years more and more people moving near me are Republicans. My neighbor across the street blasts right wing radio from his garage when he works, and my neighbors of 4 years directly over my fence, knowing my religion, have spent countless hours trying to convert me, to the point I believe them to be anti-Semitic. When they moved in, in October of 2016 right before the election I tried to be friendly and take them to lunch....after praying over the meal, telling me Hillary should be jailed, and that only Trump could save white Christians I have tried to keep my distance. After loving my neighborhood and never having a problem, I have decided it might be best to move the Bay Area around Berkeley or Oakland to be near my children and to get away from these people....I am the classic example of what the article discusses.”
I am a 71 year old woman living about 20 miles north of Boston. Yesterday I needed to take a ride and see scenes in the springtime light . I headed north into the Newburyport area and then toward Merrimac, Haverhill and I crossed the border into southern NH where I saw many Trump signs and a store selling guns and ammunition.
It mirrors my experience of driving from my home in Eugene to the coast (our getaway spot is Bandon, because it is equidistant from Eugene and Medford, where our families live), and seeing so many of the signs that supported the other guy (and I mean a 150 foot fence line with 6 plywood sized signs, multiple flags to include the Gadsden flag and thin blue line flags in addition to the National Colors). And yet, every time we were there, there was a brave group standing at the corner of US 101 and OR 42 with both the National Colors and Biden/Harris signs.
Out of curiosity, did an Trump/Republican supporters stand on a corner in Eugene prior to the election with their signs? If no and they had, what would have the reaction been by passers-by?
Oh, yeah they did. We have a HUGE pro-otherguy community here. They engaged in some sort of pro-tRump activity every week. Every time there was a BLM demonstration, these goobers showed up, in force, and aggressively engaged the BLM folks.
Reactions were mixed, just as they always are. I've stood with church groups regarding housing issues, with the Women's March, and with a law enforcement fallen officer's memorial group. Lots of both; honks in support and gestures of disagreement. I will say that since these "counter protesters from the "right"" have shown up, I have quit taking my sousaphone to protest marches to mock the "right".
It reminds me of a similar drive that i took while on business in Kassel in Germany in the early 90s. I took a drive into what was Eastern Germany and the desolation, disarray and depression was instantaneous as you crossed the border......i didn't stay long!
Same experience. You could tell when the highway in West Germany met the one in East Germany. Almost like going from a four lane expressway to a two lane country road. We'd gone ten kilometers into the Eastern Zone when we came upon a MacDonald's Double Arches! Going into East Berlin was just as bad.
I understand your fear. I'm a conservative independent that lives in a Democratic Party gerrymandered district here in Washington State. We had plenty of Biden/Harris signs out during the election and their own gun stores selling ammunition.
I’m a progressive independent living in a predominantly democratic town— we don’t have gun stores here and during the election campaign we would have pick up trucks with huge American flags speeding up on the roads.
Come out to Cheshire County (Western NH.) We have some Trumpers, of course, but the prevailing ethos here is liberals and old-hippies-in-the-hills. Keene has lots of great places to get lunch, too!
Why are you surprised? It's reality. It's been happening for decades according to the political science research. People want to live in communities of shared values. Apparently political views is the most recent added to the mix.
A Brookings Institute (a highly factual, but leans left think tank, thus should be acceptable to this group) published a report in 2017 about gerrymandering reform in which Senior Fellow Elaine Kamarck, founding director of the Center for Effective Public Management at Brookings (CEPM) stated,
"The bigger problem with relying on gerrymandering reform to increase competition is that in recent years Americans seem to have “sorted themselves” into like-minded communities. … In recent years, red states have gotten redder, blue states bluer and the same holds for counties. Thus even in the unlikely event of across the board redistricting reform, the increase in competitive congressional districts may not be very big."
In a 2018, the Supreme Court ruled on Wisconsin's redistricting plan in which Republican legislators argued that Democrats tend to congregate in two major cities which made making Congressional districts more competitive difficult. The Supreme Court rejected the lawsuit by saying "partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts." This highlights the needs for independent commissions as proposed in HR 1, but to be clear, other issues (racial, social, gender/sexual identification, etc) of drawing political boundaries will crop up.
Polarization is more a threat to continued progress toward a more Perfect Union than gerrymandering and voter suppression. A recent article in Foreign Affairs is well worth reading if you're truly interested in which squarely places the blame for polarization on party elites, both party elites, and their efforts to keep the pot stirred up.
Polarization has a negative impact on our country as a May 2020 published on a National Institute of Health website states. Here's a quote to lead off the article.
"The rise of polarization over the past 25 years has many Americans worried about the state of politics. This worry is understandable: up to a point, polarization can help democracies, but when it becomes too vast, such that entire swaths of the population refuse to consider each other’s views, this thwarts democratic methods for solving societal problems. Given widespread polarization in America, what lies ahead? We describe two possible futures, each based on different sets of theory and evidence. On one hand, polarization may be on a self-reinforcing upward trajectory fueled by misperception and avoidance; on the other hand it may have recently reached the apex of its pendulum swing. We conclude that it is too early to know which future we are approaching, but that our ability to address misperceptions may be one key factor."
I am so sorry to hear of this kind of distress, in a neighborhood which was "home" for so long. There are so many examples of people who once had great, friendly relationships with friends and family now feeling isolated and distant. This is another great toll that the former guy and his followers have inflicted on the rest of us. Unfortunately, I don't see it getting better.
Democrats face a real dilemma. It appears increasingly that the GOP has become a traiterous body, much like the Southern States iafter Lincoln was elected. Their loyalto is NOT to the union, and therefore not to the unity of the country. From all the available evidence, it appears there is deliberation to this, because the big money that funds the GOP does not want a functioning democracy. In other words, the GOP is receiving marching orders from their financial backers and those orders appear to be the destruction of American democracy. The dilemma Democrats face is knowing this and doing something about it. They could call out McConnell et al and vote to enact restrictions on moneyed political influence. But they won’t because the GOP will accuse them of being anti-democratic if they do and the Supreme Court would overrule it again. Unless Chief Justice John Roberts has had a change in heart since Citizens United. If the Republicans take back the Senate in 2022, Democrats are probably screwed: because I think we have to take McConnell at face value. I think he willndestroy the Senate in all but name if he gets the chance because a destroyed Senate is better for his masters than a Senate that is always at risk of falling again into Democratic hands. One of the great weaknesses of the Democrats is a failure of imagination: they seem unable to imagine what the GOP will actually do, what form their scorched earth policy might take. That’s because Democrats still think in terms of what’s legal and what’s not, while the Republicans don’t care. They have learned to think only in terms of power. The Democrats could go after the big money in some way, but they won’t, though Shenator Sheldon Whitehouse is making a reall effort to expose the effect of dark money on the Supreme Court. I think the GOP is just waiting for Biden or Harris, if she becomes president, to hand them the keys to power the way Obama handed Trump those keys. That’s the way Democrats role-- they want to respect the norms and the procedures, even if following those norms lead to ensuring that the next administration destroys them. So, again, the dilemma that Democrats face is do they try to exert power in the way Republicans have exerted power in order to save democracy? Or do they draw back from the exertion of power because they don’t wnt to be the ones accused of destroying the norms?
Does good avoid restraing evil because it regards the act of restraint as an aspect of evil? Is good more concerned with maintaining an umage of holding the moral high ground? Or with actually saving what is good? These are not easy times and I can make an argument that, “Yes, it’s better to hold on to the moral high ground because then at least the ideal survives! That I think was what Obama probably felt when he realized that Trump was his successor.
I love how Biden and his team are working within the framework of our established norms of civility and language that respects truth. There is no question in my mind that this is more powerful than the gobbledegook that came with former guy’s team.
But keep remembering when you think of 45 voters: The vast majority of them are not the insurrectionists, or the Hatepushers in Congress. They are ordinary people who don't do much research and will likely respond well to having jobs, roads, and food on the table with no side servings of shame. Media may try to sell us outrage and worry but that is because it sells.
If holding onto the moral high ground so "at least the ideal survives", what is the point? The ideal becomes nothing more than a brass ring on a carousel, placed so far out of reach that it can never be grasped again. This is where we are now.
Among many other of your statements, you hit the nail on the head with: "Democrats still think in terms of what’s legal and what’s not, while the Republicans don’t care. They have learned to think only in terms of power."
Yes. But as I also wrote to someone else, we should be loathe to give up the rules and very, very careful when we do so, because -- as Trump has shown us so clearly-- it is much easier to destroy than it is to rebuild. Historically, destruction has more often led to chaos for the majority than peace and justice.
I believe we are already in a civil war. This country is not united. There are two distinct groups that are fighting for legitimacy. Democrats should act as if we are in a war and that means the rules are different and should change accordingly. The Biden administration is subtlety changing some of the rules with the Covid relief bill and maintaining a realistic high ground. My hope is that he continues to change the rules by doing things that the people actually want done. In my opinion the next step should be infrastructure. Let the republicans fight the culture wars with themselves.
If you’re correct and we are already in a civil war, it’s a cold war and we do everything possible to keep it cold. Don’t be mistaken: there are some, hopefully only a few, who want a hot one. If Biden can change the rules sufficiently to ensure calm heads prevail, we should all be very grateful.
If/when violence (“a hot one”) does erupt I believe it will be asymmetrical. Actual violence would be more regional and would be in the form of terrorist attacks and racial violence. The far right does not have the power or the weapons to take on the United States government. It would not look like the first civil war. In any case, I dont think this would serve the right wing well in the end and I believe that as pockets of violence were to escalate they would loose more citizens imaginations as they did so.
I think, and hope you’re right. Also, the right is comprised of people who hate being told what to do, so their capacity to organize anything more than bribery, corruption and racism is probably minimal. Nonetheless, I don’t think we should underestimate the power of terror to paralyze things and make things much worse. See the Bolshevik Revolution and the French Revolution. Often, governments prove weaker than they appear.
Oh, I disagree. I think the Dems are entirely awake to the risks now. I agree that in the past, including the entire Obama presidency, they were as you described. But four years of Trump has awakened them to the realities. But what would you have them do? Unless they eliminate the filibuster (which looks like it probably won't happen), they are beholden to moderate Rs to get anything through the Senate, and there is zero incentive at this point for them to vote with Dems. The Senate will probably pass an infrastructure bill through reconciliation, but any further change will be stalled by Rs waiting for 2022 and their return to control of the Senate and/or House. Biden is doing the right thing: pass legislation that benefits most Americans and then sell, sell, sell it to the people.
Beholden to moderate Republicans AND moderate Democrats. If you didn't already know, Joe Manchin is the only Democrat who did not co-sponsor the For the People Act in the Senate. If you missed Rachel Maddow last night with guest Senator Raphael Warnock, here is a clip. Very informative.
I agree. The modifications being discussed now not only require standing and delivering, but standing and delivering in a "substantive manner." This means no more "Green Eggs and Ham" or reading of phone books or dictionaries. This means being able to speak for hours on end while STANDING. Recall that Wendy Davis did this for thirteen hours? She was fit and wearing tennis shoes. Can you imagine a bloviated Cruz or a doddering McConnell or a crazed Johnson or another of those rich white ancients lasting THIRTEEN hours delivering a filibuster? I say, bring it on!
Yes I’m very happy about the fact he is and I’d love to see it as polished. There was a letter to the editor in today’s Nytimes pointing out that the only things Repugs want to vote on is reducing taxes for the rich so big deal— get rid of the filibuster. I think we’re on to something too when it causes Mitch to have to gravely threaten us if we do alter it.
Thank you, Kenrick, for putting this so clearly. We are indeed caught between a rock and a hard place, and the answers aren't easy. I say, stop being nice, stop playing by the rules and just do what's right for the American people. Period.
I believe in rules, despite being aware that the GOP is manipulating them. Once both sides have stopped playing by them, we will not get them back. We ought to be reluctant to give them up, because when the rules no longer apply, what do we have to replace them but chaos? After a period of chaos, I can almost guarantee you that many Americans will opt for a government power that provides stability without concern for whether some groups are treated justly. If and when the time comes that the rules must be broken, we ought to pray those who choose to do so have some plan for healing them. It would be a new era of reconstruction.
I agree. And when you say, "stop playing by the rules", I say the Senate makes its own rules and while the Dems have power, they ought to do so. The Republicans have shown the only "rule" is power.
Good morning HCR and all the folks in this community! I admit that I hope that AG Garland is able to take charge of this "whitewashing" (great use of the term HCR as it is literally that) of the events of January 6 because today some things that, for me, are far more infuriating and more immediate have happened:
The sheriff in charge of the "investigation" (I use that term loosely) of the white man who murdered 8 people, 7 of them women and 6 of them Asian women told the press (I am paraphrasing) that the guy was "having a bad day and this was the result" and that the attack was not directed at women, rather they were "in the wrong place at the wrong time." The women were AT WORK. Let me repeat: they were AT WORK. They were not" innocent bystanders" caught up in a madman's rampage. They were TARGETED because they were AT WORK.
And as an extra sweetener to the above: the House passed a revamped Violence Against Women Act--which had been mothballed by Murderous Mitch and His Malevolent Minions in 2019--that includes enhanced protections for women who are in non-marriage relationships with violent partners and for trans women. The Gormless Obstructionists in the Senate are upset. They are upset at the idea of trans women not being targets of murder--trans women are the single most vulnerable group to assault, murder, and abuse. They are upset at the idea that the courts might be able to demand that a violent boyfriend who threatens to kill his "love object" turn over his guns for a period of time.
I am wondering how these revolting dangling members can look at their wives, daughters, and mothers--and indeed at any woman or girl--and continue to claim they care about their welfare. Oh, I forgot: they don't care. They just find it useful to trot their womenfolk out when they are caught with their pants down, or when they think it will bring them votes.
Mysogyny, alas, is rampant. I saw it over and over in my teaching years. As an example, there was a corridor near the gym in the Catholic School where I taught which the senior football team “owned”. They sat in hulking groups along the wall, chatting amongst themselves until girls came along. Then the crude, sexualized comments began. Girls were rated (out loud) on a 1 to 10 scale. Ironically that hall was the only way to the girls’ change room. The school had a weak administration. Large numbers of people complained - teachers, the occasional parent and some of the girls. The hall was permanently cleared of this group.
It only took six months.
And the football coaches complained because now they didn’t have ready access to their players and couldn’t easily fInd them.
It was, to put it gently, a flaming disgrace.
The “why” of it has always fascinated me. It’s easy to rail on perpetrators and harder to look for reasons. In a previous post I pointed out what I believe is a number of explanations - hormones (duh!), shoddy examples by parents. We have a school system which unquestionably (at least here in Canada) fails boys and pushes compliant girls way too hard so that there is a stunning gap in achievement, causing anger in boys and stress in girls. Society has had the earthquake of the end of the Industrial Revolution, and the workplace now values brains (ie certification) over brawn. Women are in the workplace in droves, as they bloody well should be if that is their choice. To stave off losing advancement opportunities men band together - just like the high school team in the hall - and find ways to torpedo opportunities for women, or simply to make life miserable for them.
And then there is the expedient of murder, as we saw this week.
Alas, there has always been mysogyny and I fear there always will be. Men are, by and large, bigger than women, conferring a physical advantage. And they are fueled by testosterone.
But I think that it is particularly rampant now. It’s easy to dismiss men as evil, and some are. But I think that today’s society is in a transition and that men’s self-worth is lower as a group than, say, sixty years ago.
Education of young males about this topic is vital. Reform of the actual education system is hugely important - for both genders are chewed up by it. Lastly, family life is spectacularly rent by the demands of the 21st century. Until that problem is solved, far too many children, considered in the whole, will be unnecessarily scarred for life.
On a personal note: I made it clear to my daughter when she hit her teenage years that she was never to go out with a guy “with whom you don’t have the last word”. I had fears of her being “persuaded” to get into a car by a drunken boyfriend. Others too, but that one persisted in my mind.
I have to be honest - she pretty much has the last word with me these days. :) I needn’t have worried.
I admit that I consider all the "biological" rationales (testosterone) for the behavior of men and boys to be pretty specious. The deliberate terrorizing of women and girls--and this is what this kind of "locker room" behavior is--is taught. Taught by coaches, by fathers, and, yes, by mothers. Boys and men are taught that females are commodified objects. They are prey. They are status symbols. This dehumanizes women and girls. The fact that this has been the "norm" for millennia is meaningless to me: I have taught students and given lectures about Aristotle's questioning of the humanity of females, about Hippocrates's theories of the "wandering womb," about the Levitican proscriptions against menstruating women. I have taught medical students who look nauseated when I use the word "vagina" and "menstruation" and NORMALIZE those words. What has been taught can be UNTAUGHT.
Gay men also engage in spousal abuse (some women do too--I admit that readily) because all forms of abuse are about power and the lust for power. The easiest way to feel powerful is be a successful bully. There are far too many of those in positions of authority in the world.
There is a meme on FB of a sign posted saying something like "Fathers protect your daughters" that is crossed out and replaced with "Fathers educate your sons." I am not providing the exact wording. Until men start owning their contributions to the terrorizing of women--the men who are silent, the men who say "not all men," the men who protest that they don't do this but don't say something to other men--we will get nowhere. Because every woman who speaks up is a target: she is "shrill," "unfeminine," a "feminazi."
I'm fed up and done with being "nice" about any of this.
100%, Linda. Most biological justifications are a crock. They're too convenient, even apart from the fact that most human behavior is cultural in origin, i.e. learned, not natural or inherited. Among the most egregious aspects is the false notion that men cannot control their urges, thus women are responsible for bad male behavior by being sexually provocative, or simply going against norms.
Eric, there are so many things I could say to refute this claim that aggression against women and the abuse and murder of women is "natural" somehow. Humans are not dogs. And dogs are trained. Humans know better--and they always have.
This assumes that human behavior is always a rational decision between good and bad.
Human behavior is learned - I’ve acknowledged that multiple times but all humans behave in ways that are inexplicable, often against their own interests. Trump voters for instance.
Motivation is often deep and inscrutable. People who view it apply the “rational actor” theory far too often.
Why have certain types of behavior persisted over millennia?
This topic fascinates me and I agree with most of the reasons you gave for the phenomenon. An interesting fact is that many men commit domestic violence on their wives when they are in the midst of a pregnancy. I think the bottom line is that it all has to do with power and control. Some men become intimidated by their pregnant wife to the extent that she is the one in control of this process. It puts some men over the edge and they find themselves lashing out. Partly it’s the male role models they had or didn’t have. Then there’s the whole phenomenon of women as beautiful objects that will enhance ones image with peers. The process of getting a woman to admire a man is like hunting prey. Rapists and serial killers are mostly motivated by the desire to control a woman and seek revenge if the man has been hurt by a romantic partner or god forbid their own mother. Some men don’t become abusive to women until suddenly they’re under huge stress ie loss of job and stuck in a house during a pandemic. Taking out hostility against a woman can be a needed release and the man is often stronger. One of my dearest friends is a man now 85 who had a smart father who explained that women are different. He told him women are more emotional and need to be protected. I think that’s a good education for boys.
I don’t know how the sheriff can stick to that story given the suspect’s confession. He’s reported to have said he has a sex addiction, had frequented massage establishments (apparently favoring Asian women) and was trying to eliminate the temptation.
This is a straight up hate crime. And frankly another example of growing hatred of women by angry men who feel spurned and irrelevant. Somehow we need to bring the temperature down. Joe Biden is certainly doing his part in calming the nation.
Diane, I think the whole "sex addict" rhetoric is designed to promote sympathy for the murderer and excuse his behavior, rather than condemn his actions. The subtext is that his supposed "sex addiction" is the fault of WOMEN who service him. It's a variation on the "boyz will be boyz" crap that Cuomo supporters are using.
All kinds of stuff is coming out about this sheriff, who apparently has worn t-shirts blaming China for Covid (using Cheeto's term for it which I will not dignify by using it). My hope is that he is removed from this investigation and a proper law enforcement officer assigned.
Not only has he worn the damn shirts, he posted it on Twitter! When will people in positions of authority realize that their public words influence others, for better or worse. Oh, I forgot. They wear it as a badge of honor.
The sheriff is also a racist as he promoted anti Asian slogans about a year ago. Ah yes, the killer had a bad day. I bet everyone here has had many bad days and didn't go out and buy a firearm and start killing people.
Ron Johnson is a racist, which is nothing new. I'm a longtime liberal who grew up working class in Flint, Michigan. I'm for the BLM movement. I voted for Ralph Warnock for Senator from Georgia. I'm support equality for all.
I'm a racist.
I was brought up in a house with parents, hard-working, highly moral Democrats who occasionally used the N-word, so I did, too. Over the years, when if became socially unacceptable to to do so, I used Blacks and African Americans. I adapted because, like most other humans on this planet, I am a sheep. I told friends that, unlike myself, racists were full of fear and resentments and would do anything to hold onto their strange semblance of superiority. By pointing this out, I anointed myself an Enlightened Man. But I was still a racist at heart. Small degree racism is still racism. Like the Bible says, sordid thoughts are still sins.
In scrolling through movie listings I dismissed watching Black movies without a second thought. When interacting with minorities I was always very friendly (perhaps overly so) and their culture held a secret fascination to me. But at the end of the day I went home to my comfy white suburb where my neighbors were also closeted racists.
We live in a world which demands yes or no, for or against. But in reality extremes are the exception. Most of us are simply evolving. Acknowledging even a scent of racism that resides inside us is a first step in that evolution. Admission of our current or former racist tendencies and a willingness to change should be cheered, not judged. Let's no longer hide our dirty little secrets. Let us bring them into the light so they may be washed clean.
I agree Randy, and I live much the same life as you. It's easy to say "I am not racist" when I live in a very monolithic white Region, not just community. And have very casual interactions with anyone of a different race. It's been this way, generally, my entire 69 year life. So I continue to question my thoughts, read & listen. I'm very insulated, for better or worse, and I am heart-broken for those who suffer at the hands of people like me. Even though I would never use violence, I need to be aware of attitudes and words that are engrained and need to be transformed.
Thanks for your comment, Barbara. Why are we hesitant to be 100% truthful about ourselves. I believe most of us are racists, to a degree. We can improve with that acknowledgement.
The only thing Ron Johnson can attest to is his own white male privilege. He's either an idiot, liar, hypocrite, or some combination. No one can ever count on safety, reasoning with or deterring a mob; that is what differentiates them from crowds. Mobs do not think; they act, usually degenerating toward worse behavior. They often start with one goal and may be diverted toward another, and they can blindly ignore reality right in front of them. Any grey-haired senator, any greying person, could have been mistaken for Mike Pence and been in mortal danger -- especially masked. Also for Nancy Pelosi and other women.
Jan 6 fits into well-documented historic patterns of crowd behavior, mobs and riots. Crowds are under control or can be managed; mobs cannot, they are crowds out of control. When completely uncontrolled, mobs become riotous. Jan 6 saw all three phases, though the latter two were not inevitable (that's where the deplorable GQP leadership matters). Mobs only stop when confronted with superior force, or when their energy dissipates and they disperse, which is what happened on Jan 6 in the absence of counter-force. Collusion of elements in government and law enforcement is also characteristic of many mobbing events. As are subsequent denials and coverups.
I've been in countless crowds, never seen a riot, and luckily had only a couple of slight brushes with mobs when living in Zambia. But all my study and experience says that mobs must be avoided whenever possible. A peabrained, privileged Repug senator simply has no credibility claiming otherwise. He will only be credible when confessing his own crimes.
Thank you for reading. Another version appeared here in January.
P Dray, At the Hands of Persons Unknown
D Horowitz, The Deadly Ethnic Riot
The Ox-Bow Incident (film)
G Rude, The Crowd in History
EP Thompson, "Moral Economy of the English Crowd," Past & Present 1971
C Weatherford, Unspeakable: The Tulsa Race Massacre
Every time I see the video of Pence being led out of the chamber, it looks to me like he had a body double--happenstance or for real, who knows. Regardless, you're right. The mob was not discriminating in their quest for blood--they would not have been checking ID.
It was pointed out here back in those days after January 6 that the Secret Service agents around Pence were all well-armed crack shots and that what was really avoided was a blood bath of rioters.
TPJ (good morning btw!) you are so right. I have to admit that I wonder if he has been the designated Voice for the Gormless Ones. He seems to be everywhere these days and is, at least from where I sit, being groomed. By whom, one wonders?
Published here before, never too many times to remind people what they are. We need to start using Hofstadter's term "pseudo-conservative" to describe them, rather then letting them hijack the honorable old word "conservative."
From "The Pseudo-Conservative Revolt", 1954:
It can most accurately be called pseudo-conservative — I borrow the term from the study of "The Authoritarian Personality" published five years ago by Theodore W. Adorno and his associates — because its exponents, although they believe themselves to be conservatives and usually employ the rhetoric of conservatism, show signs of a serious and restless dissatisfaction with American life, traditions and institutions. They have little in common with the temperate and compromising spirit of true conservatism in the classical sense of the word, and they are far from pleased with the dominant practical conservatism of the moment as it is represented by the Eisenhower Administration. Their political reactions express rather a profound if largely unconscious hatred of our society and its ways — a hatred which one would hesitate to impute to them if one did not have suggestive clinical evidence.
From clinical interviews and thematic apperception tests, Adorno and his co-workers found that their pseudo-conservative subjects, although given to a form of political expression that combines a curious mixture of largely conservative with occasional radical notions, succeed in concealing from themselves impulsive tendencies that, if released in action, would be very far from conservative. The pseudo-conservative, Adorno writes, shows “conventionality and authoritarian submissiveness” in his conscious thinking and “violence, anarchic impulses, and chaotic destructiveness in the unconscious sphere. . . . The pseudo conservative is a man who, in the name of upholding traditional American values and institutions and defending them against more or less fictitious dangers, consciously or unconsciously aims at their abolition.”
Theodore Adorno: born Theodor Ludwig Wiesengrund; (September 11, 1903 – August 6, 1969) was a German philosopher, sociologist, psychologist, musicologist, and composer known for his critical theory of society.
He was a leading member of the Frankfurt School of critical theory, whose work has come to be associated with thinkers such as Ernst Bloch, Walter Benjamin, Max Horkheimer, Erich Fromm, and Herbert Marcuse, for whom the works of Freud, Marx, and Hegel were essential to a critique of modern society. As a critic of both fascism and what he called the culture industry, his writings—such as Dialectic of Enlightenment (1947), Minima Moralia (1951) and Negative Dialectics (1966)—strongly influenced the European New Left.
As a classically trained pianist whose sympathies with the twelve-tone technique of Arnold Schoenberg resulted in his studying composition with Alban Berg of the Second Viennese School, Adorno's commitment to avant-garde music formed the backdrop of his subsequent writings and led to his collaboration with Thomas Mann on the latter's novel Doctor Faustus, while the two men lived in California as exiles during the Second World War. Working for the newly relocated Institute for Social Research, Adorno collaborated on influential studies of authoritarianism, antisemitism and propaganda that would later serve as models for sociological studies the Institute carried out in post-war Germany.
The 1950 study The Authoritarian Personality, was pioneering in its combination of quantitative and qualitative methods of collecting and evaluating data as well as its development of the F-scale personality test.
I agree, the continuation of the Big Lie remains one of the greatest threats to the future security of our democracy, creating an insidious erosion of trust in our ability to have fair elections. The rhetoric is dangerous and unhinged.
Indeed it was.
Had the mob killed Pence and Pelosi and junked the electoral college votes of a few states, the congress by state would have voted, state by state, one vote each. Trump would have claimed four more years. Riots would have brought Martial Law. Flynn and Flynn were prepared. Trump planned this.
We were close. Fascism was winning. And the big lie of the GOP threatens still.
Yes Former guy planned this event and relished watching it—how powerful he felt
People adjacent to Trump helped to set up the conditions to make that insurrectionist riot happen. Trump might be shrewd about a few things, like self-promotion, but generally he relies on others to have ideas to present to him. He’s not really that smart, and he is not really a planner or and executor.
You may be right but he kept making his Twitter messages about save the date etc so he definitely had a large part in creating this disastrous event
I don't know if it were really Trump's plan. I suspect Miller and Flynn. trump would have been completely happy with it, though, and I expect he knew about it.
Oh sure those worms would support any
I am still traumatized by how close we came to losing our democracy. I will never have any use or respect for anyone who supported the former WH occupant or still supports him and the GQP.
Flynn and Flynn, tRump, Jerrod and Miller planned this with Putin pulling puppet strings. The Republican Party is now splitting in two: the GOP and the Russian Party.
Not splitting. Decaying. More dangerous.
It really discombobulates me that there are people, who are either as dumb as a dingo’s dung, or prepared to ignore reality for some inconsistent or opaque goal, that could overturn thousands of years of human endeavour. Why? What do they gain? How do they see that playing out? This is the question that keeps me awake at night. What’s wrong with people having equality and equity? What’s wrong with us all living happily together? What’s wrong with trusting our neighbours? With having no fear? Whats wrong with the family down the road having health cover? Why deny science? Why do they want humanity to go back to no dentistry, no anti-biotics, no anaesthetic, dying of a scratch or a rotten tooth. I just don’t get it
If I were to answer that question with two words I would say abortion and socialism. I am aghast at how many people define socialism as taking all their money away and giving it to people who are too lazy to work. As for me, I’d like to give it a shot. Capitalism is a fail. What’s the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Let’s Move on.
I strongly agree that Capitalism is an abject failure. When we fail to take care of the poorest and most vulnerable among us, we are left with nothing to brag about.
Be careful with this line of thought, common with those who have given up on American democracy, which to this day is a "work in progress." America's adversaries, while themselves often adopting Capitalism, use it to attack us.
You are equating democracy with capitalism? Just because one acknowledges capitalism has failed doesn't imply that one is fed up with democracy.
No. Democracies can exist with economic systems other than our brand of capitalism. That's probably where we are heading. It works in Scandinavia. But that doesn't stop others, specifically the Russians , from seeing the flaws of our democracy as evidence of the failure of capitalism and using it to tout their brand of "democracy," which isn't even "democracy."
I wish I agreed that we are headed in that direction. Unfortunately, we have institutionalized the idea that money is power and as long as that controls who gets elected and which laws get passed, capitalism is here to stay.
Capitalism isn't a failure - Democraciy's role in defining, regulating, and guiding "free" enterprise has failed in America. We have allowed a ride'em cowboy business mentality. Capitalism is an economic model. Democracy is a government model. Socialism (the word) has been painted as communism-lite by the far right, and saving grace by the far left. To my mind, socialism is both economic and government model, which can eventually smother the initiative, creativity, and innovation that actually make America "great." Democracy's job is to assure that both business and citizens have level playing fields, support and infrastructure, but to do that, democracy must have fair elections, uncorrupted government and enforceable regulations, with a free but honest press.
MaryPat, Smart systems borrow or adapt features from others: Social Security, Unemployment Insurance, Medicare, Medicare, Veterans Benefits... They're not smothering, stunting, etc.
True. But I don't think of any of them as "Socialism" as defined by the "conservatives" who tried to demolish FDR's New Deal. I think of them as essential safety nets created by a democracy (We, the People, All of Us This Time) for a capitalistic economy. I am 100% for our democracy government to pay for ALL healthcare and education and other programs that FREE business enterprise to take risks, be innovative, create good products and services, and hire
well educated and trained folks at good (if not great) wages. Then We the People (which includes veterans, CEOs, the disabled, POC, workers, teachers, moms at home with kids...) fairly elect leaders who make sure that taxes are fair and appropriate, no one company monopolizes a market, the stock market isn't a cheater's poker game, and there are ratios for CEO to worker salaries so trillonaires can't buy our government. It will always be a game of balance. By taking the word "socialism" out of the discussion, we can serve both the people and the ideals of capitalism.
MaryPat, I think that your description matches what most Americans would like to see. FDR would nod with approval.
Thanks. It is fellow HCR fan Frederick's concept of "Democracy Capitalism." He is fleshing it out for an article, so, if it is okay with you, I will forward your responses with mine to him.
I dunno. Capitalism inevitably leads to the means of production being divorced from where the money flows (which, in our perverted governmental system also influences how power is wielded). Perhaps we need a new name for an economic system which rewards innovation while ensuring the well-being of all persons within that system. (I agree that the word socialism has become somewhat toxic, though that toxicity is an invention of the right). But at this point we are so very far away from that ideal that I think it's perfectly fair to say that capitalism has failed. Were you hired to do a job and did it as poorly as capitalism has, you would have been unemployed for centuries.
Reid, I think that we are for the most part in sync. A country's history, population characteristics, natural resources, neighbors, etc., go into the understanding of one's own social system as well other's, in addition to knowing how they are actually effecting the people. It is a are rather cumbersome and difficult equation. Learning this and being able to make in-depth comparisons is also dependent on the age, education, experience., receptiveness of the learner as well as the ability of the teacher. Sometimes small and clear steps, along with appropriate examples fuel good communication.
Yes, I suspect we have the same motives. My concern, though, is that the incrementalism of the kind of educative change you speak of is too damn slow for the mess we are in. In order for us to survive on this planet, we need nothing short of a revolution. Capitalism is also running our environmental response (and the whole world's) and we will die before people wise up. The deaths will be gruesome and cause great suffering. This is already happening, of course, and the pain will only increase. Thankfully I will be dead before the worst of it, but it is painful to contemplate the world we are leaving our grandchildren. We can lay this directly at the feet of capitalism.
You are absolutely and painfully right about the environmental response. Yes, however look at other models when considering the environment,
Environmental Performance Index (EPI) :
Turkmenistan (131)
South Africa (128)
Iraq (132)
Kazakhstan (129)
Kyrgyzstan (101)
Bosnia & Herzegovina (124)
Saudi Arabia (82)
Not everyone thinks the same way. Most people do not like change. One book that helped me get comfortable with some of the questions we have all struggled with is “The Righteous Mind” by Jonathan Haidt. It is a must read for our time. It has opened my mind to people who think differently than I do.
Another book is “The Reactionary Mind” whose author now alludes me.
They've been convinced -- for many generations going back to the Founding -- that society is a zero-sum game. Whatever Black, brown, Muslim, gay, lesbian, trans, etc., etc., etc., people gain, must be something that white people have lost. In particular, political power and financial power. How do we break that evil spell? By doing what Joe Biden and congressional Democrats are doing now--improving the lives of all Americans, not just the wealthy.
I've been pushing this for a very long time: the attempt to explain to white supremacists that it is NOT a zero sum game is countered by their preachers, their media outlets, their elected representatives (who say blatantly that "politics" is a zero sum game) who are interested only in power not in governing and legislating. It has not worked so far. The spell will not be broken in 4 short years--of which we have, maybe, two before it gets really, really nasty.
Yes! This. We have to understand that we are in the trenches NOW. We have two years to put policies in place that will convince a sufficient number of people that government has the potential to do good, both in the world and for them as individuals. That's why the Biden plan to pass meaningful legislation through reconciliation and then sell the crap out of it, is exactly the right approach.
It’s time to recognize what science has taught us: that the term “race” has been twisted and used to abuse people. The USA is a “mass” culture, consisting of many “subcultures” each of which consist of people of many colors. There are no pure white or pure black pepper. There are only Americans of various subcultures. Why are so many people so thick headed about superficial appearances, when character and personality are so much more important !
Auto correct is run by Kossacks!
People, not pepper!
:)
This has been promoted by the elite for a very long time to make sure the lower classes did not come together against them.
It serves certain of the elite to keep the pot stirred, so they can continue to have money and power and to pretend that their rapaciousness is not a problem for others or the planet.
Yes I get that. But at the end of the day, a zombie apocalypse serves nobody
They still think that it will disserve others more than them, the same story told to poor white trash so that they would support the "Plantation Elite" rather than naturally joining with the non-wage slaves to make their voices heard.
Oh, I agree, but when you live in a gated community and have loads of money and probably houses everywhere, you think you can escape. And everyone else should sacrifice, so that you can maintain your life style. Right now here in Oregon, we have some houses on the coast about to fall into the ocean and the rule is no rip rap, etc. to help your situation. But the owners are trying to get the rules that helps to not move the problem elsewhere, changed. Or pollution caused by industry, let's locate near poor (preferably POC) neighborhoods. And on it goes as it has since the agricultural revolution.
rules that help. Cannot edit.
Diana, there is a terrific but little known speech given in 1838 by Abraham Lincoln early in his career to the Young Men’s Lyceum in Springfield, Illinois. In it, he warns that there are men of deep and profound personal ambition, who would deprive Americans of theit freedom just to fulfill that ambition. Sometimes people would “overturn thousands of years of human endeavor” just to make their mark.
Lincoln notes, “Many great and good men sufficiently qualified for any task they should undertake, may ever be found, whose ambition would aspire to nothing beyond a seat in Congress, , a gubernatorial or a presidential chair, but such belong not to the family of the lion, or the tribe of the eagle....Towering genius disdains a beaten path. It seeks regions hitherto unexplored. It sees no distinction in adding story to story, upon the monuments of fame erected to others. It denies that it is glory enough to serve under any chief. It scorns to tread in the footsteps of any predecessor, however illustrious. It thirsts and burns for distinction, and if possible it will have it, whether at the expense of emancipating slaves, or enslaving freemen. Is it unreasonable, then, to expect, that some man possessed of the loftiest genius, coupled with ambition sufficient to to push it to utmost stretch, will at some time spring up among us? And when such a one does, it will require the people to be united with each other, attached to the government and laws, amd generally intelligent, to successfully frustrate his designs.”
One sees no signs of such a person yet, but that does not mean there are not people who do not see themselves in this way. Lincoln stressed the importance of unity among Americans to counter such a person’s effort. 30 years ago, I would have said that Americans were sufficiently united to do so. But look what a con artist like Trump accomplished despite his incompetence. And it may be that there are people like Charlie Koch who have such ambition but are content to go to their grave knowing that they have brought low what was once great. Certainly we now know there are dime-a-dozen politicians willing to sell themselves and the well-being of their nation out for the 30 pieces of silver it takes to remain in power.
There are certainly enough towering egos among congressional Republicans thirsting for distinction. We need to keep pulling the rug out from under them, least they gain traction.
100%. I could read Lincoln all day long and spot on.🙏
Thank you Kenrick. A powerful Lincoln quote that deserves wider prominence. But then, it's hard to go wrong quoting Lincoln. As Edwin Stanton said, "he belongs to the ages now."
I would say that we have seen such a foul figure: the Twice-Impeached, minus the genius. But he won't be the last.
Perhaps you have not read “Dark Money”? If so, put it on your list.
I should read it too.
Thanks Diana. NB, nifty alliteration in the first sentence.
Well, you lovely innocent, there is just no profit to be had in that
For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Mark 8:36. The moral choices we make feed our souls but if those choices only benefit our own needs then our souls wither. How do you turn someones gaze to the light when they are transfixed on self indulgent goals with an fixed attitude that negates the rights of others? One day at a time, one incident at a time, one choice at a time.
And there there is the maintenance of the caste system to keep them profitable and powerful. Basically, slavery mentality. Narcissism and self-aggrandizement thwart consciousness, conscience and compassion for others.
Fear, fear, fear is the driving force behind all human disfunction.
"Love is at the root at everything, all learning, all relationships, love or the lack of it."
-- Fred Rogers
Fred was a saint amongst us.
I tried to raise my kids to always be kind (like Fred). My son died in 1999 at the age of 16 in a car crash. He had 10 Catholic priests con celebrate his funeral mass, which usually doesn't happen for the 'average Joe'. But what resonated most deeply with me was when many years later, a woman told me that on the day my son died, her son, who was bullied, told her my son was the only one who had ever defended him from the bullies. Fred Rogers was a treasure and I think my son must have been one too. Kindness and love matter.
And the older I get, the more I realize that very little else matters much at all. If we were all kind and loving all the time, all other problems would be solved. Are you familiar with this Aldous Huxley quote? It's one of my favorites. "It is a bit embarrassing to have been concerned with the human problem all one's life and find at the end that one has no more to offer by way of advice than, 'Try to be a little kinder.'"
I am so sorry to hear about your son's death. Mine is 38 and I grieve when he has a hangnail. It is hard for me to fathom how I would feel if he were no longer here.
Reid... I forgot to say my son was born at Swedish Hospital. And he was able to visit Seattle before he died. He loved it. He was so proud to be born there. His first tattoo was going to be a Space needle with the letters M I S (made in Seattle)!
What a wonderful connection! It really is a great city, though it is changing so fast and in so many ways.
That and greed.
Their top priority is the preservation of their advantages over Americans with non-European ancestors. They are willing to give up many comforts as long as they maintain some of those advantages. Ezra Klein’s book on polarization has convincing and well-documented explanations of why.
Love your use of alliteration! "Dumb as a dingo's dung" and all of those words beginning with the letter "W." You're close to "getting it" when you say they are prepared to "ignore reality."
Ahem, alliteration: astonishingly absorbing, awesome and also amazing. Agreed? Absolutely! Amen. Adios.
Dumb as a dingoes dung— I like that — are you Australian?
Differing circumstances of people's childhood and adolescent years play a big role in determining their adult politics. If a person grows up in a benevolent family, trustworthy friends and a safe neighborhood, that person is more likely to behave humanistically. By contrast someone subjected to abuse or neglect by parents, and for whom a walk in the neighborhood might be dangerous because of bullies or gangs, is likely to see the world as a rough game in which people must continually defend themselves from others. These contrasting childhood situations lead to different politics, different behavior and different morals. Racism and cruelty are but two of the consequences.
It's all about white dominance and their maintaining their own power -- and democracy be damned.
I figure that many of the Republicans must have been Russian operatives. The list of all the things the Russian operatives did corresponds to what the Republicans were saying.
In Stephen Colbert's monologue tonight he mentioned T giving Jim Jordan et al medals for service to their country, adding that it would be nice if that country were the US.
I dunno, what about Rudy man? If Jordan gets a meal, Rudy has to get the Championship belt. I mean how Pro Russia and dumb is ole Rudy? Taking "security/anti terrorism consulting" fees paid by Russian backed Oligarchs instead of the Eastern Ukrainian/Russian border town he was supposed to be consulting to? The Ukrainian town is being occupied by the Russian Military. But the town didn't cut his check, the local oligarch did! Once you get him to take that money, you can get him to do ANYTHING for you. Garland's gonna light Rudy up!
https://medium.com/@PortlusGlam/rogue-agent-how-rudy-giuliani-got-paid-by-the-government-of-ukraine-to-influence-u-s-78d87fa3a886
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.detroitnews.com/amp/40233121
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/11/27/trump-lawyer-giuliani-sought-ukraine-business-deals-amid-search-for-biden-dirt.html
Could we re-appropriate the defense department budget to justice???
Hell of an idea.
I'd almost forgotten about Drooliani. The last I saw, he was melting like a wicked witch. Nothing beyond that except for a little incitement of insurrection on Jan 6.
What happened to this guy? Over here we had the impression that he was a "good" mayor of NYC....."cleaning up the city"!
As a former New Yorker I can tell you that most New Yorkers really hated Giuliani and he made himself "loved" the same way Cuomo has done: by being more competent in the face of crisis than the guy in the White House. He was also a sexual harasser and predator (like Cuomo and Drumpf). His "clean up" of Times Square merely pushed the problem into communities of color, which he consistently underfunded. Public education in NYC took a nose dive except for those schools with large white populations. He was enthusiastic about the destruction of neighborhoods with small-scale housing in favor of building enormous high-rise luxury condos that pushed working class people out. NYC was barely affordable when I was living there. It was untenable--except in the outer boroughs--after Giuliani. And there was a real disgust of him when he tried to parlay his "American's Mayor" nonsense into a presidential run.
Bingo Linda. “America’s Mayor” was a post 9/11 attempt to find a hero. It was always a lie.
Thanks Linda. That sounds infinitely more realistic and indicates that he hasn't changed at all.
All true.
Rudy has big alimony payments to make and Watch for his watch and cufflinks. The guy's greed for material wants has put him in debt/fear of debt. That is exactly the target foreign intelligence is on the look out for. Combine that with what we saw in Sasha Baren Cohen's film, and well you get the idea. A former US Attorney, Former Mayor of NYC, is now a 'Useful Idiot".
He was. Once. Not anymore. He got suckered onto the Trump Train by the specter of irrelevance. He keeps divorcing wives so he also needs money.
One of those ex wives said Rudy was never the same after an accidental fall when his head was hit hard.
I may have spent too much time working for an association for mental-health professionals, but I've wondered if Rudy has some cognitive issue going on. Maybe I just want an explanation for his behavior, though
That's interesting. I didn't know that. He does seem different. When did that happen?
When he was an infant?😜
He is still hated here for what he did to people.
Rudy is a pale shadow of his former self.
People rarely change that drastically. Like the racist element in the world, he was just swimming underwater until a fellow scum gave him opportunity to surface. (No disrespect to underwater scum).
Yes scuzzy old scum tend to attract and then stick together
Yes, he used to be shrewd & conniving now he’s just pathetic.
Yes he just kind of shriveled up into a caricature
Yep and a bunch more. Get out the popcorn. 3, 2, 1, ...
The symbolism, and outrage, of committing treason in Moscow on the 4th of July is absolutely breathtaking.
I have absolutely failed to understand why this has not been more publicized and hung out in the open air. Treasonous conduct.
Oh, I think ur right.
Read "The Road to Unfreedom" -Tim Snyder and his article is a good primer
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/16/vladimir-putin-russia-politics-of-eternity-timothy-snyder
"The ink of political fiction is blood." Most excellent essay. Snyder scores again.
“Concentration gives way to distraction”. Look at what Democracy in America gives us as teachers? 🙏HCR🙏Dr. Snyder
Oh my goodness, Tim Synder is getting racy...
"They were mindless agents of global sexual decadence whose actions threatened the innocent national organism."
Ivan Ilyn was the father/founder of "Christian Fascism" and Putin's #1 philosophical influence. Ilyn became a proponent anti revolutionary/ "counter Revolutionary by any means necessary"....seem familiar to Jan 6th? When we talk marketing, influence, running a campaign, propaganda, or Active Measures, those are investments to protect the larger golden egg. I don't think people really understand how much wealth has been stolen by the Russian Oligarchs and Putin. "To hold onto that wealth they had to export it."-Snyder. Then they must buy influence (corrupt politicians) to protect it. How do you corrupt American Politicians? just donate to their campaigns via dark money Pacs, if you cant hide enough, then pass Citizens United and make it legal. And where are all those BILLIONS? or maybe close to a trillion now? Where is all that laundered money? I think Merrick Garland could go down as the #1 cop of all time. This is bigger than Theodore Roosevelt breaking up the trusts. Garland's gonna be THE GOAT!
From your mouth to the ears of the deities
Bulldog Garland
"I don't think people really understand how much wealth has been stolen by the Russian Oligarchs and Putin. "To hold onto that wealth they had to export it."-Snyder. Then they must buy influence (corrupt politicians) to protect it." OH. Now it all makes terrifying sense.
"Human sexuality is an inexhaustible raw material for the manufacture of anxiety" Ivan Ilyn took psycho analysis from Freud. Literally, in Freuds office! History freakin' rocks!
Ur gonna love the book!
Yep. I am loving it. He is becoming the resident genius in my head
My list of must reads has grown alarmingly long. What an amazing resource you all are. Thank you.
Timothy Snyder is brilliant. "On Tyranny" was suggested to me earlier on this site. Thank you.
"In power, eternity politicians manufacture crisis and manipulate the resultant emotion. To distract from their inability or unwillingness to reform, they instruct their citizens to experience elation and outrage at short intervals, drowning the future in the present." Does that sound like the Republican Party since 1980?
Very, very short intervals, like advertising or sponsor's messaging on DT's flickering telescreen.
Messages often contradictory, to induce and maximize hypnotic confusion. Thus, the Messenger occupies all mental space and the cascade of meaningless messages transforms Messenger into Message.
The Fuehrer, the Duce, the One and Only Message.
The technique was developed in the 1930s by Hitler and Goebbels. It worked. As we have seen, it still works.
King Cobra hypnotizes the mass of his victims and feeds at will.
See Fritz Lang's M films from the period...
Pure Snyder.....no space left for truth, history and the individual.....none for freedom either.
None for life -- only death and destruction.
I know that criticism of America is unpopular, especially when it comes from furriners. As I observed in Russia, it's fine when Russians criticize their politicians, not when outsiders say the same thing. I sympathize. Yet, we must all address our blind spots. Especially the powerful. Or else superpowers risk becoming too superpowerful for their own good or anyone else's.
Like it or not we all share this magnificent blue orb hurtling through space. Our ultimate survival is a shared responsibility. We learn to coexist or we cease to exist.
Sometimes being a little more distant improves vision too.
HCR and Snyder really need to get together for coffee. HCR is so clear on our history. Snyder is so clear on Russian and Eastern Europe history. They go together like chocolate and peanut butter!
There's only one thing I am not at ease with in America's old messaging system, still that of the Democratic Party machine: the catchwords "RUSSIA/RUSSIAN".
Too much like Putin's and every tinpot dictator's code word for THE ENEMY. Yes, the eternal enemy. The inhuman, subhuman, Satanic adversary.
Bear in mind, please, if the 45th president had won (or grabbed) a second term, this is what the words AMERICA/AMERICANS would have become, indelibly, in the mind of the rest of the world: THE ENEMY.
This kind of identification is dangerous.
Of course, the "Russian Party" is not new (any more than American parties in various countries). It wasn't just "the Commies". It was Catherine the Greatest Russian Party in the Polish Sejm... And now, in Congress.
Can we not stop this pernicious business of identifiying entire peoples with their rulers? Especially when those rulers are a bunch of fascistic brigands in uniform.
Let it be "PUTIN or THE PUTIN REGIME".
Especially at this moment in time when President Biden has undiplomatically called a spade a spade.
One final comment on Timothy Snyder's pièce in the Guardian. I a m generally a keen reader of his excellent and important work.
But there's one thing he fails to mention here: the American share in responsibility for the failed reintegration of Russia and the former Soviet republics into a more convivial world order.
This was not always the work of US Administrations, but of other NeoCon free radicals, kicking Russia (fixed in many rock-solid minds as the Eternal Enemy) when she was down, visiting humiliation upon humiliation on people already humiliated.
Whether in the Kremlin or Washington, the domineering mindset that needs, that feeds on the identification of "enemies" to exist... is a built-in threat to peace. As is the doctrine of sole US hegemony that goes with it. The doctrine that dictated the gratuitous humiliation of the defeated "enemy".
A doctrine like that which transformed the defeat of Germany and Austria-Hungary into the Nazi Blitzkrieg twenty years later.
A doctrine that did much to spawn Putin's foul regime... like Mussolini's Salo Republic, a concentrate of viciousness teetering on the edge of implosion. A beast at bay.
The Putin Regime. How long the Russian people have suffered?
"Can we not stop this pernicious business of identifying entire peoples with their rulers?"
Well said, Peter. After all, do we want the rest of the world blaming all Americans for Trump's regime? But back to Russia. The Russian people have suffered immeasurably throughout so much of their history, and further abuse of them makes no sense at all. To closely paraphrase President FDR's statement during WWII, "The American people will be ETERNALLY (my caps) grateful to the Russian people for their sacrifices in this war..." To start with, 26 million Russians were killed in the struggle against fascism. They were a major ally of ours in that fight. If U.S. leadership and the state department were interested in healthy relations with Russia, they would start that new world with reference to our serious bond in WWII.
Hear, hear!
I'm saying that as the son of a naval officer who had the thankless task of escorting the Russian convoys to Murmansk and Archangel during the war... Dangerous and thankless.
But we all owe so much to people like the citizens of Leningrad, who met with Stalin's wrath after the war for surviving and overcoming without his help.
Heydon, It is not as though little has happened since WWII. Neither country is exempt from meddling with other countries, to put it mildly. We are not now cooperating nations in wartime, and it looks like you have left Putin out. Have you, perhaps, posited a backward looking position?
"Can we not stop this pernicious business of identifiying entire peoples with their rulers? Especially when those rulers are a bunch of fascistic brigands in uniform.”
Far easier said than done. As the saying goes, a people gets the leaders it deserves. Germany got Hitler because enough Germans were willing to bracket off their conscience and their humanity to ensure his power. We need to be alert because we ourselves may be, collectively, coming close.
The reply I was writing seems to have been lost, but it was just to say that we, all of us and our world, get what we deserve, and that places an immense responsibility on those who hold the greatest power. America's errors and failings are immensely costly.
We have, however, seen plenty of gross irresponsibility in recent years, or, at its most caricatural, responsibility limited to quarterly returns to shareholders...
Western Europe got the Marshall Plan, Russia got kicked when she was down. And the Russians are still being beaten every time they show any sign of independent life. Would this brutal police state be in place if America had acted more intelligently?
Let's never forget that the Russian economy is actually smaller than that of France. Government revenues are totally dominated by Oil royalties like any under-developed 3rd world country. What is appalling is the percentage of that resource, like in the US that goes to the military.....they have the excuse of being a "dictatorship"! Snyder's thesis is important as only by being able to portray foreign ventures as defensive reactions to US aggressivity can Putin and his system survive...in Russia.
Its estimated Putin has a net worth of over 200 billion stashed away. That's just his..one man with personal accounts of over 200 B! The oligarchs pay Putin royalties from their respective industries to maintain their lifestyles and power. Its obscene. I wonder if the money they steal from the Russian people every year is greater than their annual defense budget. A percentage of that money was spent on the Brexit campaign, in Austria, Hungry, and Poland, Italy, Germany, and France, and now here in America. Ukraine tried to break away and join the EU, so the Russians Invaded. Putin has the personal resources to continue influence operations for decades. IT is how he buys the political protection for laundering and holding his cash, real estate, who knows what assets are out there. It is but one reason DT discredits our Justice Dept, Intel Agencies and FBI. There is going to be a huge reckoning.
Red Notice-Bill Browder
The Road to Unfreedom-Tim Snyder
The Man without a Face - Masha Gessen
Reeses 100%. Made in America.
Dark chocolate. HCR is dark chocolate. Far richer and more complex than that weenie milk chocolate stuff.
Hey! I like milk chocolate!! Haha
Tastes may differ but we believe in an inclusive chocoholic society!
Dark chocolate dipped in chunky peanut butter.
YUM! Count me in!
Chunky peanut butter and Reese's for the win!
Peanut butter dipped in peanut butter, yum
Mmmmmmm!
Sorry, Catherine the Great's... Zap those Kremlin gremlins !
Great suggestion!!!!
How the South won and Wounded Knee & the road to unfreedom have so many of the same lessons. It’s enlightening! Both books Reinforce each other like concrete and rebar.
Still useful but not as tasty.
One of my favorite authors including The Holocaust: Its History and Meaning and his book on Eastern Europe, the title of which escapes at the moment.
Snyder's book on the Holocaust is "Black Earth: The Holocaust as History and Warning" and the one on 20th C. Eastern Europe is "Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin."
Nothing particularly new unfortunately. The first government that Françoise Mitterand put together in 1981 was found later to have been totally penetrated by then USSR influence. I seem to remember a report afterwards saying that everyone of his cabinet had received Russian and Communist Party financing in one shape or form.....and most ended up in front of a judge for corruption too! A very unhappy period which has left a lasting legacy in France affecting "permissable" political thought and shifting the goalposts for the last 40 years.
Just a hint about the career of this first "socialist" President of the 5th French Republic François Mitterand.....Junior Minister in the fascist, Hitler collaborating Petain wat-time government.....Minister of Defense who signed the permission for torture by the French Army in Algerian "Civil War"and arch-destroyer of the 4th Republic......Brought the Socialists and Communists to power as elected President of the 5th Republic..........and you call that a democrat? More a highly intellectual, organized pre-Trump!
If Mitterand was an American, it's the longtime mistress and illegitimate child that would do him in.
Not if he were a present day Republican.
In England too! But here having a mistress was part of the macho mystique. The mistress was one of the top people at the Musée d'Orsay and lived with her daughter in the Presidential Palace at public expense...while the guy's wife didn't and without public knowledge as the press were complicit in protecting politicians "privacy" .
Stuart, usually your comments seem to be your own, even when—like all the rest of us—you’ve thought matters through and freely espoused someone else's views because they correspond to your own. And there's not necessarily the shadow of a prejudice in all that. But here it does all sound like predigested opinion handed down to you by someone else, friends or family? (In this connection, I'd be interested to know how you see General de Gaulle in particular, and other major 20th century French politicians.)
I don't have an axe to grind here—I have never had any party affiliation, but I have spent most of a lifetime observing politics, often from quite close quarters. One thing I learned from this is to put aside my likes and dislikes and recognize ability. I don't know about you, but I was spending quite a bit of my time in Paris when Mitterrand came to power. Like Charles de Gaulle, the man was too big to be likeable, too much the republican monarch—shades of Louis XI, when it wasn't Louis XIV. Like General de Gaulle, he attracted much bitter hatred—maybe more of that than admiration. I remember one of my dearest friends, a deeply anti-Communist woman of ninety, speaking of him as though he were the devil incarnate!
I'd be interested to know your documentation on Soviet penetration—not forgetting the extent of this throughout western Europe or how it did for one of the ablest statesmen of the postwar period, Willi Brandt—but Mitterrand must have been one of the most genuinely Machiavellian politicians since Napoleon. And the most notable aspect of his relation with the French Communist Party was how he invited it into his initial coalition government like the witch inviting Hansel and Gretel into her house... and utterly destroyed it. No mean feat—the PCF had been a massive and seemingly permanent feature of the French political scene since the war. They, too, were Machiavellian, and I learned quite a bit about politics from observing their activities as a very young student in Paris in 1958.
The misfortune is that the Joker in the post-Communist pack has been Jean-Marie and Marine Le Pen and the far-Right—France’s new “Russian party”.
Here, I’d just like to note a personal observation that I cannot prove because my reasoning is too inductive, but regardless of Soviet moles in the network, it has always seemed to me that the US services paid close attention to rising talent in the non-Communist Left throughout Europe. This is rational enough. No need to waste too much time on well-established conservative allies, rather to help displace Soviet influence by promoting Socialists and Social-Democrats. It seems probable to me that members of Mitterrand’s government (maybe the man himself) will have been courted by both KGB and CIA… Hence, perhaps, the stains on some reputations.
I did not “like” either Mitterrand or Thatcher, and while I did not dislike Helmut Kohl, I never forgot Brandt wiping the floor with him in debate as a younger man. But the disastrous decline in political standards comes after these major figures, just as, in America, it comes AFTER Richard Nixon. If we’re looking for a leader comparable to Mitterrand in US politics, it might be Lyndon Johnson. Mitterrand avoided involvement in the Yugoslav wars, doubtless remembering LBJ’s albatross. And the only leader who got the full measure of that horror and would have been willing to act against it was Thatcher, sidelined and replaced by… shall I be polite?... lesser figures.
Thanks for your thoughts, Peter. I agree with a great deal of what you have written. My experience of Mitterand is firstly based on 25 years living in Paris and prior to that 25 years living in Montreal in an "exiled" french family where discussion of French politics was "de rigeur"....and mostly on the left à la Nouvels Obs! My opinions have been developed over that time, like yours, from personal observation, reading and discussion with others. The part that others shared concerning Mitterand was mixed early in that period but as his true character and political contribution became clearer much less so and the conclusions....other than in the militant socialist's eyes...are far from elogiac concerning either the person or his impact. That he thought that he was a great statesman in the image of Talleyrand and with a bow to Macchiavelli is obvious....and all accept that he was extremely intelligent and cultivated. The reality however tended to confirm that he used his skills strictly for his own glorification...and when he felt like lying to the French public, he could give Trump etc a few lessons.
The differences that I would underline, in my opinion...never sufficiently humble i admit...with De Gaulle is that De Gaulle was called to the job "to save the nation" twice, knew that his character, role and position were macchiavellian.....and Napoleonesque....but he used his skills strictly for the people and considered that the people were the only source of legitimacy. There have been a couple of TV series/films on him recently which are very good and close to reality about the man and the role he played.
On the question of Soviet penetration...my sources were vague memories, newspaper reports at the time and subsequent interviews with people like Hubert Vedrine and other "intelligent" french foreign ministers since...not a crowd I must admit and not necessarily certain sources. This element, as you point out is not what distinguished this particular group amongst European politicians. The competition with the CIA is of course clear, but less so in France with their tendency towards an innate anti-americanism and the intellectuals adoration of the Communist regimes in the 50s and 60s. However what is now coming out is the close relationship that the CIA had with the French politicians considered to be the founding fathers od European Union; Jean Monet and Robert Schuman.
Mitterand as a French LBJ.....not at all the same spirit nor the desire to nudge, influence and corral others into supporting his legislative program. His tactic was distinctly more deadly and his main concern was to maintain dominance of the Socialist Party while crushin,g the Communists (these being already significantly weakened after the failures of George Marchais). You could examine his destruction of Michel Rocard who he named Prime Minister in order to better destroy him and his influence in the Party...or Pierre Beregovoy, another of his PMs who he drove to suicide.
Lastly , on the subject of Le Pen, the putative French "Russian" party you should have a look at Mitterand's introduction of Proportional representation splitting representation of the right and maintaining thus the minority rule of his party. Ever since the "Russian" Party has been diabolized by the left...while politely ignoring similar if opposite extremism from the Hard-Left...maintaining the split in the right preventing a majority take-over of the governmental function.
The result of these games and the increasing dominance of the "intersectional ideologies" on the left has led the working stiff in this country to support the hard-right giving Marina Le Pen a very probable victory in the next presidentials if nothing changes and the present incumbant insists on running again....despite her evident incompetence and being surrounded by some very dubious characters...in 2022.
Thanks for the very helpful conversation. Some of this may seem marginal to immediate American concerns, but if there is one thing that becomes more and more blindingly obvious with every passing year it is interdependence and the paramount importance of relationships at all levels. And how leaders whose legitimacy is grounded in humane values and the rule of law are to defend and strengthen our democratic institutions from the wild beasts at home and abroad -- quite a safari!
For the rest, it will always be good if we get more of an opportunity to talk more about French politics and such characters as Mongénéral, Rocard, Chirac and the heroes of French history like Jaurès and Clemenceau... For me, de Gaulle was quite beyond "like" and "dislike", his heroic certainty, his courage and charisma just blew me away. I was never surprised that Malraux should have taken to him as he did. He'd already described the figure in the person of Colonel Ximénès (that Frenchified spelling!) the Civil Guards officer defending the Spanish Republic in his novel L'Espoir.
Unfortunately, we are again living in an age that calls for heroic courage, great skill and the ability to break free of habits, prejudices and outworn shibboleths. The relationship between the old -- the generation of Biden and Bernie Sanders -- and the young will be essential and education, especiallu civic education, must everywhere be an absolute priority. One hell of a challenge to us all!
In America, one politician I shall be keeping an eye on is Stacey Abrams... But there I bring our detour to an end. Thanks again.
Absolutely agreed.
Read about Gerard Schroeder/Russian oil/gas industry after leaving office.
Agreed -- more than agreed. Another of these José Manuel Barroso-type opportunists. But while Mitterrand represented What's-in-it-for-us? there has been a lot of What's-in-it-for-me? since his departure. And then, there's the whole issue of German-Russian, indeed Euro-Russian relations, stymied by the presence of bandits in Moscow... but also by Anglo-American mistrust of the natural potential for developing a community of interests. Germans were always influential in the development of modern Russia. And not just Catherine II.
The conundrum is that Schroeder when Chancellor introduced some much needed reforms to the German economy which confirmed the thought that it takes a Social Democrat to initiate right of center reforms....classic. He gave no hint at the time of the personal economic agenda that he has displayed since. But that said, the orientation of Germany to the East rather than to the West is nothing new. France was the enemy for centuries and much of the UK's foreign policy during the 17-19th centuries was to ensure that it stayed that way....fully occupying them while England ruled the seas and built an industrial revolution and a commercial empire.
Yep--he was a pip, eh?
Not really operatives, not on the Russian payroll nor being blackmailed. Actually they were what the Russians consider "useful idiots." Many Trumpublicans continue to be ignorant and gullible, and support racist policies as well as far-right conspiracy theories in an effort to undo everything good the United States has accomplished since FDR. This saves the Russians the job of convincing the world that American democracy is a failure. So long as the Republican Party does that job for them, they don't even need "Manchurian" candidates. Acclimated by the former president to accept lies, Republicans can't even identify Russian lies when they repeat them themselves. Yes, "useful idiots."
Of course, they are. Lacking integrity, morals, and/or character they are perfect targets for an intelligence operation. Oh, did I mention their unquenchable need for money to retain 'power'?
Putin’s Russia is an oligarchy. The Republican Party is doing its best to turn the USA into an oligarchy. Its biggest sponsors are oligarchs. They call themselves libertarians but their brand of libertarianism is the politically feasible route to oligarchy. Most Republicans probably aren’t Russian operatives or even “useful idiots,” but they are doing exactly what Putin and his cronies would want them to do. They are totally in synch, whether by collusion, by accident, or — most likely — by lust for money and power. If anything, most Republicans are “useful idiots” doing the bidding of America’s oligarchs and wannabes. Trump is another animal. I’m convinced he is a “useful idiot” or worse.
I agree whether they were conscious of this or not.
Remember these a names that voted against honoring the Capital Police who fought to defend our democracy.
The Post truth neo-fascists awards of the day go to.....
Andy Biggs (Ariz.)
Thomas Massie (Ky.)
Andy Harris (Md.)
Lance Gooden (Tex.),
Matt Gaetz (Fla.)
Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.)
Louie Gohmert (Tex.)
Michael Cloud (Tex.)
Andrew S. Clyde (Ga.)
Greg Steube (Fla.)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/03/17/dozen-republicans-voted-against-congressional-gold-medals-police-who-protected-them-jan-6/
Bob Good (Va.)
John Rose (Tenn.).
And have to add Ron Johnson-WI, for lying in order to rewrite history as soon as history happened. That must be something really remarkable for HCR, to be writing history at the same time Ron is lying about it for future historians to get wrong in the future?
Who purchased Mr. Johnson?
I recall someone writing that every person in congress needs to wear the patches of their sponsors, much like the racing culture. That would make it ever so much easier to identify them.
He's from Wi. Dick and Besty Devos are his patrons.
Ah, well, of course they would fund malevolent ignorance
but they think its the normal human state
If Hitler and Ivan Ilan considered themselves “ Christian Fascists” then the devos’s
Would be considered “Calvinist Fascists”
Ah yes, Dick and Betsy DeVos of the Amway pyramid scheme.
Remember, Putin had his federal agents raided the Amway Moscow office during her reign. It’s no secret the Devos’ have a lot of cash banked in Russia. That’s leverage Putin can put a boot on.
What an excellent idea. Or perhaps tattooed on their foreheads?
666
Just as they tattooed runaway slaves.
He's a Putin baby.
We could also dress them in full American Football regalia too....pads, helmets and all.....blockers all in search of a real quaterback!
I like that analogy. Also, they don't have a coach with a playbook.
Currently they do...he/she is called Mr/Mrs Billionaire!
Oh, McConnell has a playbook, indeed he does.
Moral compasses MIA. Quick, somebody organize a search party.
Moral compasses that never existed might be difficult to locate
Demonstrating, by the fact the largest single group of them are Texican goat ropers, that Texas *needs* to become "a whole other country." Permanently.
You obviously don't realize how close Texas is to becoming purple and then blue shortly after. The Republicans in Texas are scared sh**less. Of course, it is traditional every two years when the legislature meets that there is a bill to secede.
And Texas has given us Ann Richardson, Molly Ivins and Jim Hightower... While my beloved California has foisted Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Devin Nunes, Daryl Issa, and Kevin McCarthy on the nation. Now if we could get all of those horrid people to go live in their own country, maybe at Mar-o-Largo, ...
The problem is those guys think the United States IS their own country and are just trying to solidify that for the rest of us.
Hello Cathy, it's good that you explain things about TX for those of us who are less well-informed. If there's a real chance of 5 Texases, it'd be scary, and possibly upset Dems' new-state strategy. Yet it is so thrilling to contemplate TX politics being as good as the best of its people.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wi6MY84Fmt0
They would have to seriously gerrymander the new state borders to have all the cities in one state thus limiting the democrat Senatorial gain to 2 while the others would hope to haul in the other 8. If there was a city in each them the Democrats might cream all 10. There are however in old statutes imposing population minima for recognition of states; a Lone Star state with only Abbot as resident wouldn't quite cut it.
I really don't think Texas is ready to give up its everything is BIG in Texas attitude. When Alaska became a state and put Texas in second place in size, Texans just replied "wait until the ice melts".
Thanks to climate disruption, it certainly is melting.
Yes that’s great to contemplate-/ I know one Texas family I greatly admire and I worked briefly with John Silber.
Hi Liz, four-decade BU guy here. I know where the bodies are buried, almost literally.
So in my 20’s I was assigned by a temporary agency to transcribe his letters and debates with students and such for only about a month or so. It was interesting to say the least. In one of the debates, I realized what a very clever liar he was. He had to appear that he was right. Many of the letters had to do with attracting and snaring the biggest names in terms of wealth and fame to land at BU or stay there. My stint in that mansion like building was around a Christmas time somewhere in mid 70’s. He was the very soul of diligence.
This is the fuel behind all those bills in the legislature to suppress the vote in Texas and all those desperate speeches that Abbott is making nowadays. They are literally terrified. So much so that the Trump/Pence signs have finally come down in my little town and the MAGAts are in hiding. Not so on the coast though, where a plethora of "F... Biden" signs have flourished.
I think it needs to happen in Texas. The cities are some of largest in the country. Texas has a diversity of population and so many colleges and universities. Austin. And my favorite is Democrat, former Seal commander, chancellor of the TX university system, William McRaven. So I believe it’s possible.
As a native-born Texan with lots of Texan friends, I keep hearing this (I used to hear it from progressives who were going after these scum when they were "Democrats" 50 years ago), have heard it so long that I am no longer going to hold my breath, since anyone who does will be certain to turn blue and die. That said, the bottle of bubbly I will pop when it happens is now so old it should be *really* good.
The Republicans are doing everything they can to slow things down. Beto O'Rourke came so close to unseating Senator Cruz that it really shook the Republicans. I attended a webinar on redistricting in Texas with one of the speaker being the State of Texas Demographer. Over half of the population change since the 2010 census is Hispanic who largely vote Democratic. Bottom line is we all need to support the grass roots movement to help get the For the People Act passed and into law before the 2022 elections! Otherwise we will be an oligarchy kleptocracy with one last election in 2024 to solidify the minority Republican rule. Vote as if this is the last election you'll be allowed to vote in!
My grandfather came to Texas as a boy in a covered wagon at the turn of the 20th century. My dad was born in Texas but I was born in Kansas. My parents, grandparents and great grandparents are all buried in the Old Oakwood Cemetery just one mile from the Texas Capitol building in Austin.
Dear Cathy, your cemetery is lovely, much larger than expected in a downtown historic district. Hopefully you can visit as often as you like. Though none are close, I've been to two of our three family cemeteries. Not Cherry Hill NJ yet; so far, Hudson QC and McKnightstown PA, in the heart of the 1863 Gettysburg campaign.
When you get to Cherry Hill, I'll treat you to a nice lunch/dinner in Haddonfield!
Nice. The Old Oakwood Cemetery is particularly beautiful about this time of year when bluebonnets and other wildflowers are in bloom.
Let me add that Texan Lyndon Baines Johnson (D) gave the United States the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Actually you should be more frighten that by Treaty with the US when it chose to become a state it may split into as many as five states. Thing of the number of Senators Texas would then have... LOL!
Since when does the US respect treaties with “internal” entities?
A little history lesson for you. Texas was the Republic of Texas, a sovereign country in its own right from 1836 to 1845 when it decided to join the United States in 1845. So it is the only state that became a state through a Treaty between two nations. Texas has been under six flags:
1 Spain (1519 to 1685; 1690 to 1821)
2 France (1684 to 1690 for Fort Saint Louis and 1800 to 1803 as French Louisiana)
3 Mexico (1821 to 1835)
4 Republic of Texas (1836 to 1845 as the Republic of Texas; since 1845 as the State of Texas)
5 United States of America (1845 to 1861; 1865 to present)
6 Confederate States of America (1861 to 1865)
0. Comanches (lords of the plains)
Empire of the Harvest Moon-S.C. Gwynne
https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Empire-of-the-Summer-Moon/S-C-Gwynne/9781416591061
He did indeed, and one has to commend him, having "come up" in the system he did. The Texas "Democratic" Party was composed of the same kind of "southernists" that the Texas "Republican" Party is composed of today. Being a Texas progressive isn't easy - I think of my lawyer back then, whose house was waaaaaaaayyyyyy back from the country road outside of town. When I commented about that, he said "Yes, it's out of range."
Since many of the internal entities are white men
I say cut it loose. Let Mexico have it, they could even rename it as Texico!
"Texas" IS a Mexican name.
Texas was part of Mexico in the early nineteenth century. Remember the Alamo! Texas gained its independence from Mexico in 1836.
They’d have to tear down that wall (and recycle it)
Quaking in my (cowboy) boots!
Some people have said Texas was always its own country an$ would be happy to stay that way
Yeah? Let's see how their economy does without all the US military bases.
Texas would do fine since it is already the 9th largest economy ($1.9 trillion) in the world which is larger than Canada or South Korea. The 15 military bases contribute about $186 billion to its GDP.
Amazing how mostly "red" states are so dependent upon hand-outs from the feds!
Yes and I’m really glad Congress honored the capitol police— they didn’t even have permission to use their guns— and yes that’s good because it would have been a bloodbath—but what they endured was horrendous
It irks me no end that if there were men of color within that crowd, there would have been killings and it would have been deemed ok. And THEN these republicans would have had a different story. It’s so blatantly racist and criminal.
Blatant for sure and shameless as hell— I think the shamelessness pairs well with a peculiar form of privileged arrogance
It's time for us to begin stating the obvious: these people and others of their ilk (Hawley, McConnell, Cruz, etc.) need to be removed from office. They do not represent anyone but themselves, their crazed TQP cultists and Putin.
We will.
There are statesmen from other mature Democracies that would scoff at the U.S. capitol being called a "temple" of Democracy, but that would be coming from the perspective of witnessing U.S. imperialism interfering in other countries elections. However in Canada, US exceptualism has been identified as the US civic faith, so using the word temple instead of church would make sense.
Regardless of the use of the word chosen, the capitol is the highest symbol of our Democracy. To attack it specifically in orderto interupt the certification of the national vote and the will of the people and the electors, would be reported by democratic news media outside the US as a failed overthrow of the election. It was a planned insurrection to overthrow the Democratic process. If we do not call it that, it is to deny we are a Democracy.
I recall words from a song popular during the Civil War... "We'll finish the Temple of Freedom, and set up an altar within, where all who would worship are welcome, whatever the hue of their skin." That language has historical resonance.
Yes, wonderful words, but a different time in history, and an inclusive message with language that has historical resonance, that may not be as relatable today.
They could have use "highest symbol of our Democracy" or something more contemporary
& inclusive, because words matter.
I can not sing many old songs & hymns because the language is not inclusive. I know we can do better! "We are a Democracy"
Thanks for all the great comments and conversation. I'm learning so much that helps me have constructive, meaningful conversations w friends, family and neighbors💙
While the Republicans rubbed me the wrong way throughout 45's fascist administration, they grate even more offensively now as they reveal their contempt for every act that smacks of decency, valor, and ethical values! Thank you, Dr. HCR, for holding their feet to the fire of truth!
Professor Richardson, please compile all your letters into a book. These need to be available in every High School in 4 years.
the challenge with that marvelous idea is the folks who approve the texts...
Doesn't need to be curriculum. Just being in school libraries and on recommended reading lists could be impactful.
Osmosis. A copy under every pillow.
Unfortunately due to the fact that public education is so poorly funded in most states, school libraries are being cut in droves.
Good point, Ginger. The pandemic has also hit libraries hard, with less traffic making it harder to justify budgeting when govt revenues are way down.
I just hope that substack is storing a copy of all linked pages, so historians later can access them all even though many will no longer be on the web.
I doubt they are. That might be a project for someone.
They could have them digitally now if each school was gifted a subscription
The Letters are easy to find and read without a paid subscription. It’s our wonderful community here that we pay to access, as well as to support Dr. Richardson in this worthy endeavor.
If an index could be added, it would be an invaluable resource.
Kathy I guess that’s true but $50. Isn’t that much for a school to pay to then allow the students to converse
I agree completely. There is a similar, much larger, and free community on Facebook as well. But I spend an awful lot of time reading here! I doubt students have that kind of time, even if it would be so good for them.
It took me time after I subscribed to come to the commentary section here. In the before times, I would spend my time reading and replying on Facebook rather than here. I find these conversations much more fulfilling and informative.
I don’t do Facebook
Yes, a lot of us have discovered facebook is NOT Free. It costs in many ways and is a detriment to ones peace of mind. It is insidious.
I don’t think most students do either!
Many periodicals, and most academic ones, have far higher institutional subscription prices than for Individuals. LFAA isn't truly academic, but there are a variety of factors to consider with subscriptions.
Absolutely a fair and balanced narrative about cure events from HCR is educational.
Are you kidding! That would NEVER be allowed. Nevaahhh! They’d say it was fake history.
Agreed!
I keep remembering Fiona Hill's testimony in the first impeachment trial. No one seems to have remembered or commented on that, but I distinctly remember her saying something to the effect that some of her questioners were saying exactly what Russia wanted them to say, that they were peddling Russian talking points. She, of course, put it much better than I just did. But I would love to see someone interview her right now . . .
Yes, she did say just that.
The Republican Party is the biggest threat to the Republic.
And the Democratic Party, even if flawed, is democracy’s only hope.
Yes
The Russian Party.
In today’s Letter, Professor Richardson writes,
“Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines declassified the assessment of the intelligence community of foreign threats to the 2020 U.S. federal elections that had been provided to the previous administration and congressional leadership on January 7. The community assessed that Russian President Vladimir Putin authorized influence operations, which “a range of Russian government organizations conducted,” “aimed at denigrating President Biden’s candidacy and the Democratic Party, supporting former President Trump, undermining public confidence in the electoral process, and exacerbating sociopolitical divisions in the U.S.””
Yesterday, the New York Times published an article describing a recent study of the segregation of our neighborhoods along partisan lines. It is an unsettling piece, not least because the corrosive effects of the previous administration and the political philosophy it supported, has taken root so firmly. Russia, Ron Johnson and the Right political establishment generally, if not coordinating their efforts to divide Americans from one another, are at the very least, singing from the same songbook.
What follows is one of the reader comments to the article.
“I am a 71 year old Jewish male living in a suburb of Sacramento County, and in fact in the same community as Governor Newsom who is 2 miles downriver from me. I have lived in my home for 35 years and in the beginning when the homes were built it was a solidly professional yet liberal tract. However over the years more and more people moving near me are Republicans. My neighbor across the street blasts right wing radio from his garage when he works, and my neighbors of 4 years directly over my fence, knowing my religion, have spent countless hours trying to convert me, to the point I believe them to be anti-Semitic. When they moved in, in October of 2016 right before the election I tried to be friendly and take them to lunch....after praying over the meal, telling me Hillary should be jailed, and that only Trump could save white Christians I have tried to keep my distance. After loving my neighborhood and never having a problem, I have decided it might be best to move the Bay Area around Berkeley or Oakland to be near my children and to get away from these people....I am the classic example of what the article discusses.”
(Source: Comment to NYT article, “A Close-Up Picture of Partisan Segregation, Among 180 Million Voters” https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/03/17/upshot/partisan-segregation-maps.html?searchResultPosition=1)
Thank you, RD. It'd be a shame to have to move, instead of the actual offending parties.
I am a 71 year old woman living about 20 miles north of Boston. Yesterday I needed to take a ride and see scenes in the springtime light . I headed north into the Newburyport area and then toward Merrimac, Haverhill and I crossed the border into southern NH where I saw many Trump signs and a store selling guns and ammunition.
It mirrors my experience of driving from my home in Eugene to the coast (our getaway spot is Bandon, because it is equidistant from Eugene and Medford, where our families live), and seeing so many of the signs that supported the other guy (and I mean a 150 foot fence line with 6 plywood sized signs, multiple flags to include the Gadsden flag and thin blue line flags in addition to the National Colors). And yet, every time we were there, there was a brave group standing at the corner of US 101 and OR 42 with both the National Colors and Biden/Harris signs.
Brave indeed
Out of curiosity, did an Trump/Republican supporters stand on a corner in Eugene prior to the election with their signs? If no and they had, what would have the reaction been by passers-by?
Oh, yeah they did. We have a HUGE pro-otherguy community here. They engaged in some sort of pro-tRump activity every week. Every time there was a BLM demonstration, these goobers showed up, in force, and aggressively engaged the BLM folks.
Reactions were mixed, just as they always are. I've stood with church groups regarding housing issues, with the Women's March, and with a law enforcement fallen officer's memorial group. Lots of both; honks in support and gestures of disagreement. I will say that since these "counter protesters from the "right"" have shown up, I have quit taking my sousaphone to protest marches to mock the "right".
Live Free AND Die
I couldn’t wait to turn around and head south
It reminds me of a similar drive that i took while on business in Kassel in Germany in the early 90s. I took a drive into what was Eastern Germany and the desolation, disarray and depression was instantaneous as you crossed the border......i didn't stay long!
Stuart I noticed that I was suddenly anxious as I picked up a vibration that was palpably strange and aggressive
Same experience. You could tell when the highway in West Germany met the one in East Germany. Almost like going from a four lane expressway to a two lane country road. We'd gone ten kilometers into the Eastern Zone when we came upon a MacDonald's Double Arches! Going into East Berlin was just as bad.
I'll bet. What a letdown.
It was more like a rude awakening
I understand your fear. I'm a conservative independent that lives in a Democratic Party gerrymandered district here in Washington State. We had plenty of Biden/Harris signs out during the election and their own gun stores selling ammunition.
I’m a progressive independent living in a predominantly democratic town— we don’t have gun stores here and during the election campaign we would have pick up trucks with huge American flags speeding up on the roads.
Come out to Cheshire County (Western NH.) We have some Trumpers, of course, but the prevailing ethos here is liberals and old-hippies-in-the-hills. Keene has lots of great places to get lunch, too!
I bet there are wonderful places all over NH just not where I was yesterday
I had a decent lunch yesterday in a Panera just over the border from Haverhill
I have great memories of a beautiful old hotel by a loke just over the Vermont border on the way down to Boston where we frequently stayed a while.
I have beautiful memories of The Rabbit Hill Inn right over the border from NH. Vermont is one of my favorite states.
If you put yourself in the other's shoes....the offending party moved.
Why are you surprised? It's reality. It's been happening for decades according to the political science research. People want to live in communities of shared values. Apparently political views is the most recent added to the mix.
A Brookings Institute (a highly factual, but leans left think tank, thus should be acceptable to this group) published a report in 2017 about gerrymandering reform in which Senior Fellow Elaine Kamarck, founding director of the Center for Effective Public Management at Brookings (CEPM) stated,
"The bigger problem with relying on gerrymandering reform to increase competition is that in recent years Americans seem to have “sorted themselves” into like-minded communities. … In recent years, red states have gotten redder, blue states bluer and the same holds for counties. Thus even in the unlikely event of across the board redistricting reform, the increase in competitive congressional districts may not be very big."
In a 2018, the Supreme Court ruled on Wisconsin's redistricting plan in which Republican legislators argued that Democrats tend to congregate in two major cities which made making Congressional districts more competitive difficult. The Supreme Court rejected the lawsuit by saying "partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts." This highlights the needs for independent commissions as proposed in HR 1, but to be clear, other issues (racial, social, gender/sexual identification, etc) of drawing political boundaries will crop up.
Polarization is more a threat to continued progress toward a more Perfect Union than gerrymandering and voter suppression. A recent article in Foreign Affairs is well worth reading if you're truly interested in which squarely places the blame for polarization on party elites, both party elites, and their efforts to keep the pot stirred up.
Polarization has a negative impact on our country as a May 2020 published on a National Institute of Health website states. Here's a quote to lead off the article.
"The rise of polarization over the past 25 years has many Americans worried about the state of politics. This worry is understandable: up to a point, polarization can help democracies, but when it becomes too vast, such that entire swaths of the population refuse to consider each other’s views, this thwarts democratic methods for solving societal problems. Given widespread polarization in America, what lies ahead? We describe two possible futures, each based on different sets of theory and evidence. On one hand, polarization may be on a self-reinforcing upward trajectory fueled by misperception and avoidance; on the other hand it may have recently reached the apex of its pendulum swing. We conclude that it is too early to know which future we are approaching, but that our ability to address misperceptions may be one key factor."
Gerrymandering and Polarization
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brookings-now/2017/07/06/a-primer-on-gerrymandering-and-political-polarization/
Guardrails of Democracy
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2021-03-15/real-guardrails-democracy-are-its-citizens?utm_medium=newsletters&utm_source=fatoday&utm_campaign=The%20Real%20Guardrails%20of%20Democracy%20Are%20Its%20Citizens&utm_content=20210315&utm_term=FA%20Today%20-%20112017
Polarization impact on National Psyche
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7201237/
No - not surprised.
Thanks for the links.
There well worth reading if you get the time.
I am so sorry to hear of this kind of distress, in a neighborhood which was "home" for so long. There are so many examples of people who once had great, friendly relationships with friends and family now feeling isolated and distant. This is another great toll that the former guy and his followers have inflicted on the rest of us. Unfortunately, I don't see it getting better.
I am grateful to be made aware.
Democrats face a real dilemma. It appears increasingly that the GOP has become a traiterous body, much like the Southern States iafter Lincoln was elected. Their loyalto is NOT to the union, and therefore not to the unity of the country. From all the available evidence, it appears there is deliberation to this, because the big money that funds the GOP does not want a functioning democracy. In other words, the GOP is receiving marching orders from their financial backers and those orders appear to be the destruction of American democracy. The dilemma Democrats face is knowing this and doing something about it. They could call out McConnell et al and vote to enact restrictions on moneyed political influence. But they won’t because the GOP will accuse them of being anti-democratic if they do and the Supreme Court would overrule it again. Unless Chief Justice John Roberts has had a change in heart since Citizens United. If the Republicans take back the Senate in 2022, Democrats are probably screwed: because I think we have to take McConnell at face value. I think he willndestroy the Senate in all but name if he gets the chance because a destroyed Senate is better for his masters than a Senate that is always at risk of falling again into Democratic hands. One of the great weaknesses of the Democrats is a failure of imagination: they seem unable to imagine what the GOP will actually do, what form their scorched earth policy might take. That’s because Democrats still think in terms of what’s legal and what’s not, while the Republicans don’t care. They have learned to think only in terms of power. The Democrats could go after the big money in some way, but they won’t, though Shenator Sheldon Whitehouse is making a reall effort to expose the effect of dark money on the Supreme Court. I think the GOP is just waiting for Biden or Harris, if she becomes president, to hand them the keys to power the way Obama handed Trump those keys. That’s the way Democrats role-- they want to respect the norms and the procedures, even if following those norms lead to ensuring that the next administration destroys them. So, again, the dilemma that Democrats face is do they try to exert power in the way Republicans have exerted power in order to save democracy? Or do they draw back from the exertion of power because they don’t wnt to be the ones accused of destroying the norms?
Does good avoid restraing evil because it regards the act of restraint as an aspect of evil? Is good more concerned with maintaining an umage of holding the moral high ground? Or with actually saving what is good? These are not easy times and I can make an argument that, “Yes, it’s better to hold on to the moral high ground because then at least the ideal survives! That I think was what Obama probably felt when he realized that Trump was his successor.
I love how Biden and his team are working within the framework of our established norms of civility and language that respects truth. There is no question in my mind that this is more powerful than the gobbledegook that came with former guy’s team.
I love it too. I just pray that’s enough!
They need a well informed thinking populace who support them and spread the word.
I agree. However the challenge is that a bit less than half the populace is not thinking and not well informed.
But keep remembering when you think of 45 voters: The vast majority of them are not the insurrectionists, or the Hatepushers in Congress. They are ordinary people who don't do much research and will likely respond well to having jobs, roads, and food on the table with no side servings of shame. Media may try to sell us outrage and worry but that is because it sells.
No kidding Hale—I don’t even want to hazard a guess about the percentage of our citizens who have good critical thinking skills
If holding onto the moral high ground so "at least the ideal survives", what is the point? The ideal becomes nothing more than a brass ring on a carousel, placed so far out of reach that it can never be grasped again. This is where we are now.
Among many other of your statements, you hit the nail on the head with: "Democrats still think in terms of what’s legal and what’s not, while the Republicans don’t care. They have learned to think only in terms of power."
Yes. But as I also wrote to someone else, we should be loathe to give up the rules and very, very careful when we do so, because -- as Trump has shown us so clearly-- it is much easier to destroy than it is to rebuild. Historically, destruction has more often led to chaos for the majority than peace and justice.
I believe we are already in a civil war. This country is not united. There are two distinct groups that are fighting for legitimacy. Democrats should act as if we are in a war and that means the rules are different and should change accordingly. The Biden administration is subtlety changing some of the rules with the Covid relief bill and maintaining a realistic high ground. My hope is that he continues to change the rules by doing things that the people actually want done. In my opinion the next step should be infrastructure. Let the republicans fight the culture wars with themselves.
If you’re correct and we are already in a civil war, it’s a cold war and we do everything possible to keep it cold. Don’t be mistaken: there are some, hopefully only a few, who want a hot one. If Biden can change the rules sufficiently to ensure calm heads prevail, we should all be very grateful.
If/when violence (“a hot one”) does erupt I believe it will be asymmetrical. Actual violence would be more regional and would be in the form of terrorist attacks and racial violence. The far right does not have the power or the weapons to take on the United States government. It would not look like the first civil war. In any case, I dont think this would serve the right wing well in the end and I believe that as pockets of violence were to escalate they would loose more citizens imaginations as they did so.
I think, and hope you’re right. Also, the right is comprised of people who hate being told what to do, so their capacity to organize anything more than bribery, corruption and racism is probably minimal. Nonetheless, I don’t think we should underestimate the power of terror to paralyze things and make things much worse. See the Bolshevik Revolution and the French Revolution. Often, governments prove weaker than they appear.
2020 new gun sales: 40 million units the FBI reports.
Or the simple philosophy of taking the high road when others go low. Not always the most natural impulse but admirable as a human habit.
Oh, I disagree. I think the Dems are entirely awake to the risks now. I agree that in the past, including the entire Obama presidency, they were as you described. But four years of Trump has awakened them to the realities. But what would you have them do? Unless they eliminate the filibuster (which looks like it probably won't happen), they are beholden to moderate Rs to get anything through the Senate, and there is zero incentive at this point for them to vote with Dems. The Senate will probably pass an infrastructure bill through reconciliation, but any further change will be stalled by Rs waiting for 2022 and their return to control of the Senate and/or House. Biden is doing the right thing: pass legislation that benefits most Americans and then sell, sell, sell it to the people.
Beholden to moderate Republicans AND moderate Democrats. If you didn't already know, Joe Manchin is the only Democrat who did not co-sponsor the For the People Act in the Senate. If you missed Rachel Maddow last night with guest Senator Raphael Warnock, here is a clip. Very informative.
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/warnock-the-american-people-are-being-squeezed-out-of-their-own-democracy-108737093774
Yes, but at this point Manchin (Sinema, too) only matters if you also have 10 Rs to go along with them, an unlikely prospect.
Modifying the filibuster it our best chance now. Fortunately Biden is on board.
I agree. The modifications being discussed now not only require standing and delivering, but standing and delivering in a "substantive manner." This means no more "Green Eggs and Ham" or reading of phone books or dictionaries. This means being able to speak for hours on end while STANDING. Recall that Wendy Davis did this for thirteen hours? She was fit and wearing tennis shoes. Can you imagine a bloviated Cruz or a doddering McConnell or a crazed Johnson or another of those rich white ancients lasting THIRTEEN hours delivering a filibuster? I say, bring it on!
Yes I’m very happy about the fact he is and I’d love to see it as polished. There was a letter to the editor in today’s Nytimes pointing out that the only things Repugs want to vote on is reducing taxes for the rich so big deal— get rid of the filibuster. I think we’re on to something too when it causes Mitch to have to gravely threaten us if we do alter it.
And, as the whole Biden-Administration administration has done to date, refuse to be drawn into gutter fight stye rhetoric. Just keep doing the work.
Thank you, Kenrick, for putting this so clearly. We are indeed caught between a rock and a hard place, and the answers aren't easy. I say, stop being nice, stop playing by the rules and just do what's right for the American people. Period.
I believe in rules, despite being aware that the GOP is manipulating them. Once both sides have stopped playing by them, we will not get them back. We ought to be reluctant to give them up, because when the rules no longer apply, what do we have to replace them but chaos? After a period of chaos, I can almost guarantee you that many Americans will opt for a government power that provides stability without concern for whether some groups are treated justly. If and when the time comes that the rules must be broken, we ought to pray those who choose to do so have some plan for healing them. It would be a new era of reconstruction.
I agree. And when you say, "stop playing by the rules", I say the Senate makes its own rules and while the Dems have power, they ought to do so. The Republicans have shown the only "rule" is power.
Good morning HCR and all the folks in this community! I admit that I hope that AG Garland is able to take charge of this "whitewashing" (great use of the term HCR as it is literally that) of the events of January 6 because today some things that, for me, are far more infuriating and more immediate have happened:
The sheriff in charge of the "investigation" (I use that term loosely) of the white man who murdered 8 people, 7 of them women and 6 of them Asian women told the press (I am paraphrasing) that the guy was "having a bad day and this was the result" and that the attack was not directed at women, rather they were "in the wrong place at the wrong time." The women were AT WORK. Let me repeat: they were AT WORK. They were not" innocent bystanders" caught up in a madman's rampage. They were TARGETED because they were AT WORK.
And as an extra sweetener to the above: the House passed a revamped Violence Against Women Act--which had been mothballed by Murderous Mitch and His Malevolent Minions in 2019--that includes enhanced protections for women who are in non-marriage relationships with violent partners and for trans women. The Gormless Obstructionists in the Senate are upset. They are upset at the idea of trans women not being targets of murder--trans women are the single most vulnerable group to assault, murder, and abuse. They are upset at the idea that the courts might be able to demand that a violent boyfriend who threatens to kill his "love object" turn over his guns for a period of time.
I am wondering how these revolting dangling members can look at their wives, daughters, and mothers--and indeed at any woman or girl--and continue to claim they care about their welfare. Oh, I forgot: they don't care. They just find it useful to trot their womenfolk out when they are caught with their pants down, or when they think it will bring them votes.
Give me strength.
I think a lot of them are deep misogynists too
Mysogyny, alas, is rampant. I saw it over and over in my teaching years. As an example, there was a corridor near the gym in the Catholic School where I taught which the senior football team “owned”. They sat in hulking groups along the wall, chatting amongst themselves until girls came along. Then the crude, sexualized comments began. Girls were rated (out loud) on a 1 to 10 scale. Ironically that hall was the only way to the girls’ change room. The school had a weak administration. Large numbers of people complained - teachers, the occasional parent and some of the girls. The hall was permanently cleared of this group.
It only took six months.
And the football coaches complained because now they didn’t have ready access to their players and couldn’t easily fInd them.
It was, to put it gently, a flaming disgrace.
The “why” of it has always fascinated me. It’s easy to rail on perpetrators and harder to look for reasons. In a previous post I pointed out what I believe is a number of explanations - hormones (duh!), shoddy examples by parents. We have a school system which unquestionably (at least here in Canada) fails boys and pushes compliant girls way too hard so that there is a stunning gap in achievement, causing anger in boys and stress in girls. Society has had the earthquake of the end of the Industrial Revolution, and the workplace now values brains (ie certification) over brawn. Women are in the workplace in droves, as they bloody well should be if that is their choice. To stave off losing advancement opportunities men band together - just like the high school team in the hall - and find ways to torpedo opportunities for women, or simply to make life miserable for them.
And then there is the expedient of murder, as we saw this week.
Alas, there has always been mysogyny and I fear there always will be. Men are, by and large, bigger than women, conferring a physical advantage. And they are fueled by testosterone.
But I think that it is particularly rampant now. It’s easy to dismiss men as evil, and some are. But I think that today’s society is in a transition and that men’s self-worth is lower as a group than, say, sixty years ago.
Education of young males about this topic is vital. Reform of the actual education system is hugely important - for both genders are chewed up by it. Lastly, family life is spectacularly rent by the demands of the 21st century. Until that problem is solved, far too many children, considered in the whole, will be unnecessarily scarred for life.
On a personal note: I made it clear to my daughter when she hit her teenage years that she was never to go out with a guy “with whom you don’t have the last word”. I had fears of her being “persuaded” to get into a car by a drunken boyfriend. Others too, but that one persisted in my mind.
I have to be honest - she pretty much has the last word with me these days. :) I needn’t have worried.
I admit that I consider all the "biological" rationales (testosterone) for the behavior of men and boys to be pretty specious. The deliberate terrorizing of women and girls--and this is what this kind of "locker room" behavior is--is taught. Taught by coaches, by fathers, and, yes, by mothers. Boys and men are taught that females are commodified objects. They are prey. They are status symbols. This dehumanizes women and girls. The fact that this has been the "norm" for millennia is meaningless to me: I have taught students and given lectures about Aristotle's questioning of the humanity of females, about Hippocrates's theories of the "wandering womb," about the Levitican proscriptions against menstruating women. I have taught medical students who look nauseated when I use the word "vagina" and "menstruation" and NORMALIZE those words. What has been taught can be UNTAUGHT.
Gay men also engage in spousal abuse (some women do too--I admit that readily) because all forms of abuse are about power and the lust for power. The easiest way to feel powerful is be a successful bully. There are far too many of those in positions of authority in the world.
There is a meme on FB of a sign posted saying something like "Fathers protect your daughters" that is crossed out and replaced with "Fathers educate your sons." I am not providing the exact wording. Until men start owning their contributions to the terrorizing of women--the men who are silent, the men who say "not all men," the men who protest that they don't do this but don't say something to other men--we will get nowhere. Because every woman who speaks up is a target: she is "shrill," "unfeminine," a "feminazi."
I'm fed up and done with being "nice" about any of this.
100%, Linda. Most biological justifications are a crock. They're too convenient, even apart from the fact that most human behavior is cultural in origin, i.e. learned, not natural or inherited. Among the most egregious aspects is the false notion that men cannot control their urges, thus women are responsible for bad male behavior by being sexually provocative, or simply going against norms.
Right it’s always some unique combo between nurture and nature but it sure is not the fault of women.
I don’t deny all the cultural factors. I , in fact, list some.
But to dismiss the “biological rationales” as “specious” is an exceedingly dubious proposition.
Millions of generations of human beings leaves an indelible imprint. I can scarcely credit this.
My golden retriever chases balls with unbridled joy and tenacity not because I’ve taught him or he’s made a conscious choice.
He can’t *not* chase balls, due to genetic imprinting.
And that comes from a tiny fraction of the amount of time that humans have passed on their genes.
The fact that it has been “the norm” for millennia may be meaningless to you. It is still a fact and it runs much deeper than simply being a norm.
Eric, there are so many things I could say to refute this claim that aggression against women and the abuse and murder of women is "natural" somehow. Humans are not dogs. And dogs are trained. Humans know better--and they always have.
This assumes that human behavior is always a rational decision between good and bad.
Human behavior is learned - I’ve acknowledged that multiple times but all humans behave in ways that are inexplicable, often against their own interests. Trump voters for instance.
Motivation is often deep and inscrutable. People who view it apply the “rational actor” theory far too often.
Why have certain types of behavior persisted over millennia?
This topic fascinates me and I agree with most of the reasons you gave for the phenomenon. An interesting fact is that many men commit domestic violence on their wives when they are in the midst of a pregnancy. I think the bottom line is that it all has to do with power and control. Some men become intimidated by their pregnant wife to the extent that she is the one in control of this process. It puts some men over the edge and they find themselves lashing out. Partly it’s the male role models they had or didn’t have. Then there’s the whole phenomenon of women as beautiful objects that will enhance ones image with peers. The process of getting a woman to admire a man is like hunting prey. Rapists and serial killers are mostly motivated by the desire to control a woman and seek revenge if the man has been hurt by a romantic partner or god forbid their own mother. Some men don’t become abusive to women until suddenly they’re under huge stress ie loss of job and stuck in a house during a pandemic. Taking out hostility against a woman can be a needed release and the man is often stronger. One of my dearest friends is a man now 85 who had a smart father who explained that women are different. He told him women are more emotional and need to be protected. I think that’s a good education for boys.
Job well done!
I don’t know how the sheriff can stick to that story given the suspect’s confession. He’s reported to have said he has a sex addiction, had frequented massage establishments (apparently favoring Asian women) and was trying to eliminate the temptation.
This is a straight up hate crime. And frankly another example of growing hatred of women by angry men who feel spurned and irrelevant. Somehow we need to bring the temperature down. Joe Biden is certainly doing his part in calming the nation.
Diane, I think the whole "sex addict" rhetoric is designed to promote sympathy for the murderer and excuse his behavior, rather than condemn his actions. The subtext is that his supposed "sex addiction" is the fault of WOMEN who service him. It's a variation on the "boyz will be boyz" crap that Cuomo supporters are using.
All kinds of stuff is coming out about this sheriff, who apparently has worn t-shirts blaming China for Covid (using Cheeto's term for it which I will not dignify by using it). My hope is that he is removed from this investigation and a proper law enforcement officer assigned.
Not only has he worn the damn shirts, he posted it on Twitter! When will people in positions of authority realize that their public words influence others, for better or worse. Oh, I forgot. They wear it as a badge of honor.
The sheriff is also a racist as he promoted anti Asian slogans about a year ago. Ah yes, the killer had a bad day. I bet everyone here has had many bad days and didn't go out and buy a firearm and start killing people.
I agree this is a hate crime stoked by Former guy and the FBI ought to get involved and we should all do what we can to support the Asian community.
What the killer is addicted to fantasies about dominating Asian women.
Tragically yes.
Ron Johnson is a racist, which is nothing new. I'm a longtime liberal who grew up working class in Flint, Michigan. I'm for the BLM movement. I voted for Ralph Warnock for Senator from Georgia. I'm support equality for all.
I'm a racist.
I was brought up in a house with parents, hard-working, highly moral Democrats who occasionally used the N-word, so I did, too. Over the years, when if became socially unacceptable to to do so, I used Blacks and African Americans. I adapted because, like most other humans on this planet, I am a sheep. I told friends that, unlike myself, racists were full of fear and resentments and would do anything to hold onto their strange semblance of superiority. By pointing this out, I anointed myself an Enlightened Man. But I was still a racist at heart. Small degree racism is still racism. Like the Bible says, sordid thoughts are still sins.
In scrolling through movie listings I dismissed watching Black movies without a second thought. When interacting with minorities I was always very friendly (perhaps overly so) and their culture held a secret fascination to me. But at the end of the day I went home to my comfy white suburb where my neighbors were also closeted racists.
We live in a world which demands yes or no, for or against. But in reality extremes are the exception. Most of us are simply evolving. Acknowledging even a scent of racism that resides inside us is a first step in that evolution. Admission of our current or former racist tendencies and a willingness to change should be cheered, not judged. Let's no longer hide our dirty little secrets. Let us bring them into the light so they may be washed clean.
Beautifully spoken Randy. If we’re white in America, confronting our unconscious racism is an ongoing process. Like weeding a garden over and over.
I agree Randy, and I live much the same life as you. It's easy to say "I am not racist" when I live in a very monolithic white Region, not just community. And have very casual interactions with anyone of a different race. It's been this way, generally, my entire 69 year life. So I continue to question my thoughts, read & listen. I'm very insulated, for better or worse, and I am heart-broken for those who suffer at the hands of people like me. Even though I would never use violence, I need to be aware of attitudes and words that are engrained and need to be transformed.
Thanks for your comment, Barbara. Why are we hesitant to be 100% truthful about ourselves. I believe most of us are racists, to a degree. We can improve with that acknowledgement.
Here is a book that really hit me between the eyes. "Waking up White."
https://www.debbyirving.com/the-book/
Thanks, Barbara!
Thank you, Randy Watson!
Are you interested in or attempting to become Anti-racist?
I try every day, Julie.
The only thing Ron Johnson can attest to is his own white male privilege. He's either an idiot, liar, hypocrite, or some combination. No one can ever count on safety, reasoning with or deterring a mob; that is what differentiates them from crowds. Mobs do not think; they act, usually degenerating toward worse behavior. They often start with one goal and may be diverted toward another, and they can blindly ignore reality right in front of them. Any grey-haired senator, any greying person, could have been mistaken for Mike Pence and been in mortal danger -- especially masked. Also for Nancy Pelosi and other women.
Jan 6 fits into well-documented historic patterns of crowd behavior, mobs and riots. Crowds are under control or can be managed; mobs cannot, they are crowds out of control. When completely uncontrolled, mobs become riotous. Jan 6 saw all three phases, though the latter two were not inevitable (that's where the deplorable GQP leadership matters). Mobs only stop when confronted with superior force, or when their energy dissipates and they disperse, which is what happened on Jan 6 in the absence of counter-force. Collusion of elements in government and law enforcement is also characteristic of many mobbing events. As are subsequent denials and coverups.
I've been in countless crowds, never seen a riot, and luckily had only a couple of slight brushes with mobs when living in Zambia. But all my study and experience says that mobs must be avoided whenever possible. A peabrained, privileged Repug senator simply has no credibility claiming otherwise. He will only be credible when confessing his own crimes.
Thank you for reading. Another version appeared here in January.
P Dray, At the Hands of Persons Unknown
D Horowitz, The Deadly Ethnic Riot
The Ox-Bow Incident (film)
G Rude, The Crowd in History
EP Thompson, "Moral Economy of the English Crowd," Past & Present 1971
C Weatherford, Unspeakable: The Tulsa Race Massacre
Every time I see the video of Pence being led out of the chamber, it looks to me like he had a body double--happenstance or for real, who knows. Regardless, you're right. The mob was not discriminating in their quest for blood--they would not have been checking ID.
It was pointed out here back in those days after January 6 that the Secret Service agents around Pence were all well-armed crack shots and that what was really avoided was a blood bath of rioters.
TPJ (good morning btw!) you are so right. I have to admit that I wonder if he has been the designated Voice for the Gormless Ones. He seems to be everywhere these days and is, at least from where I sit, being groomed. By whom, one wonders?
Published here before, never too many times to remind people what they are. We need to start using Hofstadter's term "pseudo-conservative" to describe them, rather then letting them hijack the honorable old word "conservative."
From "The Pseudo-Conservative Revolt", 1954:
It can most accurately be called pseudo-conservative — I borrow the term from the study of "The Authoritarian Personality" published five years ago by Theodore W. Adorno and his associates — because its exponents, although they believe themselves to be conservatives and usually employ the rhetoric of conservatism, show signs of a serious and restless dissatisfaction with American life, traditions and institutions. They have little in common with the temperate and compromising spirit of true conservatism in the classical sense of the word, and they are far from pleased with the dominant practical conservatism of the moment as it is represented by the Eisenhower Administration. Their political reactions express rather a profound if largely unconscious hatred of our society and its ways — a hatred which one would hesitate to impute to them if one did not have suggestive clinical evidence.
From clinical interviews and thematic apperception tests, Adorno and his co-workers found that their pseudo-conservative subjects, although given to a form of political expression that combines a curious mixture of largely conservative with occasional radical notions, succeed in concealing from themselves impulsive tendencies that, if released in action, would be very far from conservative. The pseudo-conservative, Adorno writes, shows “conventionality and authoritarian submissiveness” in his conscious thinking and “violence, anarchic impulses, and chaotic destructiveness in the unconscious sphere. . . . The pseudo conservative is a man who, in the name of upholding traditional American values and institutions and defending them against more or less fictitious dangers, consciously or unconsciously aims at their abolition.”
I had read Hofsteder but have not heard of Adorno. 🙏
Theodore Adorno: born Theodor Ludwig Wiesengrund; (September 11, 1903 – August 6, 1969) was a German philosopher, sociologist, psychologist, musicologist, and composer known for his critical theory of society.
He was a leading member of the Frankfurt School of critical theory, whose work has come to be associated with thinkers such as Ernst Bloch, Walter Benjamin, Max Horkheimer, Erich Fromm, and Herbert Marcuse, for whom the works of Freud, Marx, and Hegel were essential to a critique of modern society. As a critic of both fascism and what he called the culture industry, his writings—such as Dialectic of Enlightenment (1947), Minima Moralia (1951) and Negative Dialectics (1966)—strongly influenced the European New Left.
As a classically trained pianist whose sympathies with the twelve-tone technique of Arnold Schoenberg resulted in his studying composition with Alban Berg of the Second Viennese School, Adorno's commitment to avant-garde music formed the backdrop of his subsequent writings and led to his collaboration with Thomas Mann on the latter's novel Doctor Faustus, while the two men lived in California as exiles during the Second World War. Working for the newly relocated Institute for Social Research, Adorno collaborated on influential studies of authoritarianism, antisemitism and propaganda that would later serve as models for sociological studies the Institute carried out in post-war Germany.
The 1950 study The Authoritarian Personality, was pioneering in its combination of quantitative and qualitative methods of collecting and evaluating data as well as its development of the F-scale personality test.
Wait, who do they call Rhino?
I agree, the continuation of the Big Lie remains one of the greatest threats to the future security of our democracy, creating an insidious erosion of trust in our ability to have fair elections. The rhetoric is dangerous and unhinged.