18 III 2023: If a former president is a criminal, we must indict him or fail as a nation

For a long time now people have been carrying on as if the President of the United States were not a citizen who once held office, but a sacrosanct king who could do no wrong. A criminal is a criminal and must be prosecuted, and if this criminal is some sort of muckety-muck, someone notorious and wealthy, there is all the more reason that he must be prosecuted.

Oh, but Trumpy is anticipating the next stage of his persecution. As if it had been divinely revealed to him, he is predicting the date of his arrest and his mistreatment at the hands of the high priests and pharisees. He is summoning his worshippers to come to his aid, telling them “Protest, take our nation back,” which, being interpreted means: “Stage a revolt and keep me out of jail.”

And if his devotees riot because of his shocking grievances, and do violence at his bidding as on Jan 6, he won’t be to blame. No, he’ll again follow the Nazi public relations model. They denied party responsibility for the manifold brutality of Kristalnacht, and attributed the beating, pillaging, and murder of Jews to the righteous anger of “racial comrades” among the German people.

16 III 2023: “Parents’ Bill of Rights”

There is a bill before Congress that its authors and proponents call “The Parents Bill of Rights Act.” They claim this novel legislation will provide parents with a greater say in what educators teach. The authors of this bill are pandering to people whom they themselves have frightened by misrepresenting current trends in education. 

They are trying to disguise their bid for hegemony by misappropriating the title Bill of Rights. Parents do have a right and a duty to provide and direct the education of their children. However, they have no right to force public school curricula to coincide with their own beliefs or prejudices. Our public schools are responsible to the entire pluralistic community, not to any sect or political party. 

If parents find public school curricula offensive or inadequate they must found their own schools. Nineteenth-century Roman Catholics considered the public schools incompatible with Catholic teachings and educational philosophy, and so they created an alternative school system. Segregationists reacted to mandated integration of schools by founding their own segregated schools or “Christian academies.” Advocates of educational methodologies and curricula unavailable in public schools have founded their own schools, as have parents who were simply not content with the quality of education provided by public schools.

This “Parents Bill of Rights Act” is an attempt to provide the cover of law for efforts by Christian nationalists to impose their beliefs and their will on their fellow citizens. They like to claim that “America is a Christian country,” but if America is subjected to the control of these people, it will no longer be the United States of America nor in any way Christian.

15 III 2023: The vicious and stupid at play

1) “San Francisco Considers $5 Million Reparations Payouts To Eligible Black Adults.”  OK, but I think that in a Western state first consideration should be given to the few native Americans that remain. And, come on, $5 Million is chicken feed.

2) A state legislator in South Carolina (the home of the Confederacy, remember) has proposed a bill that would impose the death penalty for abortions. He had 23 co-sponsors for the bill. Imitators in the other barbarian states will probably try to outdo South Carolina by enacting laws that anyone who has an abortion will go to Hell.

3) Minnesota state senator Steve Drazkowski voted against a free lunch for children bill because “I have yet to meet a person in Minnesota that is hungry.”

14 III 2023: Republicans and Appeasement

DeSantis says that supporting Ukraine is not a vital national interest of the U.S.A. 

Does he, like Trump, have a passion for totalitarians? 

Does he believe Russia cannot be defeated? 

He is maybe re-enacting fascist Joe Kennedy who knew that England could not defeat the Nazis and the U.S. should stay well away. Or maybe he feels Neville Chamberlain’s reluctance to become involved in a “quarrel in a faraway country, between people of whom we know nothing.”

Hard to know for sure. But this I do know: If Biden were to declare that we should have nothing to do with Ukraine, this wannabe dictator DeSantis would be howling that Ukraine’s freedom is essential to America’s well being.

9 III 2023: Second-Amendment Chaos

The undefined right to freedom of speech has been misunderstood, misapplied, and abused. So also has the Second Amendment’s “right of the people to keep and bear arms.” America, with its 122 guns for every 100 souls is a paradise for firearms manufacturers and the horror and laughing-stock of the civilized world. 

The Second Amendment protects a right to keep and bear arms in support of “a well regulated Militia.” Nothing is said about stand your ground, open and closed carry, automatic weapons, butt stocks, and all the other excesses of American gun culture, but the Second Amendment has been stretched thin to cover all these and much more, and more energy and cash have been expended in defense of an inflated and elaborated understanding of “gun rights” than in defense of any other rights guaranteed us by the Bill of Rights.  

The consequence of this has been a neglect of regulation of firearms that would be unthinkable in any sophisticated society. Did the founding fathers even imagine that America would become so degenerate that its courts and legislatures would turn a provision meant to create a militia into a license for childishness and criminality?

4 III 2023: Free speech, however foul?

Yesterday’s Huffpost carried an article by Christopher Mathias: “Exposed: Dallas Humber, Narrator Of Neo-Nazi ‘Terrorgram,’ Promoter of Mass Shootings.” It describes the extensive use of the internet by this deranged woman and other neo-nazis to report, praise, and inspire racial conflict and murder. These people have created what Mathias aptly calls a “hagiology” of mass-shooters who are actually hailed as “saints.”

It seems that very few legal actions can be taken against these perverts. Their online activity is clandestine, or stops just short of actionable incitement to violence, and the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech is interpreted as protecting even criminals like these.

The First Amendment’s “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech” is not accompanied by any indication of what is meant by “freedom of speech.” This has led to extension of the protection speech beyond what good sense could imagine, to include pornography, out-and-out lies, blatant grifting, gross ignorance, verbal assaults, incitements to violence, and all but the most demented utterances of racism and misogyny. Naive understanding of freedom of speech has always been a problem, but this problem, like so many others, has been exacerbated and made more obvious by the evolution of the internet.

Of course, the argument is usually made that any attempt to limit speech will have a “chilling effect” on freedom of speech. This may be. But utter failure to limit the use of speech denies the potentially destructive power of words. Verbal aggression can be as violent as physical aggression, even though it is more easily disguised. Lies can be dangerous. Misinformation can be dangerous. The magical rhetoric of advertising can be dangerous. Incitement to religious or political frenzy can be dangerous.

I can think of no way to limit speech without risking deleterious side effects. But I believe it should be possible to hold people responsible for the consequences of their speech. This would require a more extensive definition of fraud and a more honest and sensitive understanding of the varieties of violence. Yes, any constraint on speech runs the risk of the “chilling effect.” But it has been clear and is becoming clearer that some constraint is required, since citizens insist on freedom of speech without accepting the duties of self-restraint that accompany this right. 

25 II 2023: Another sleaze seeking attention 

We have heard from a Rep. Lance Gooden from Texas who is accusing his fellow representative Judy Chu of disloyalty to the U.S. and collusion with Communist China because of her defense of a Biden appointee.

Good Ole Lance is quoted as follows: “Gooden said in the interview, “I think that Judy Chu needs to be called out. … I question her either loyalty or competence. If she doesn’t realize what’s going on, then she’s totally out of touch with one of her core constituencies,” he said. “I’m really disappointed and shocked that someone like Judy Chu would have a security clearance and entitled to confidential intelligence briefings until this is figured out.”

“He’ll huff and he’ll puff ….” He says “Judy Chu needs to be called out,” but what he is really saying is “I need some attention paid to me, so I’ll do what the rest of the Republicans are doing and claim there is scandal where there is none.” He says he is “really disappointed and shocked that someone like Judy Chu ….” Is he “really” disappointed and shocked or isn’t he imitating the theatrical indignation of other Republican wannabe muckrakers? And I’ve got to wonder if a Republican congressman from Texas can really be disappointed or shocked by anything at all?

12 II 2023: Nuts and crooks own the news

I looked at the Huffpost website this morning with some disgust. Admittedly, Sunday is a poor news day, but instead of news of cute children, local tragedies, rescued pets, and little known facts, I find, instead, that the webpage is a fascist news sheet manipulated by rightwing nutters to keep themselves before the public eye. Reports about these monsters are rarely complimentary to them, but that does not matter, for they know they are winning so long as their photo and name make the frontpage.

So, in today’s Huffpost I found the following children of notoriety (I give the number of their mentions in parentheses): Donald Trump (5), Marjorie Taylor Greene (4), George Santos (3), Ron DeSantis (3), and one mention each for Mike Lee, Jim Jordan, Ron Johnson, Matt Gaetz, Sarah Huckaby Sanders, Kari Lake, and of two salaried fonts of misinformation, Lisa Kennedy Montgomery and Tucker Carlson from Fox News.

Why is this? Well, scandal sells, and the behavior of these figures is scandalous by design. Indeed, some of them compete in conjuring up ever new and more shocking scandals. And the media, keen to maintain their own notoriety at any cost, keep playing right into the hands of these bogus people, become less and less trustworthy, and provide some credibility to the accusation of “fake news.”

8 II 2023: Government or entertainment?

Reactions of Republicans in Congress to President Biden’s State of the Union address revealed, I think, something about the way many of them view government. There were shouts, boos, and other interruptions. I guess the standard was set by Marjorie Taylor Greene with her outcries and other attempts to draw attention to herself, but many other Republicans also joined in the fun.

Let’s not consider the impropriety of this kind of behavior at a formal government event. Rather, let’s ask at what kind of event such behavior would be expected. We see fans at sporting events let it all hang out in cheering their favored team and reviling their opponents. In another setting, the old Golden Rod showboat in St. Louis advertised its old melodramas by inviting playgoers to “Cheer the hero, hiss the villain!”

I think many Republicans, especially the MAGA and semi-MAGA types, view political life and government as a highly competitive game in which mindless support of their “side” and unrelenting denunciation of the other are all that matters. We could also say that very many Republicans in Congress view government as a melodrama in which they are the heroes and their opponents the villains. In both cases, government is not about real life, but is a game or drama that is a faint copy of real life.

2 II 2023: Bowdlerized history

De Santis has blocked African-American studies from the Florida schools. His mindless slogan is “We want education, not indoctrination,” as if the bowdlerized version of American History he wants to inflict on the children is not a mendacious indoctrination. If De Santis were a German demagogue, he would want to exclude the Nazi period from German history courses.