plinyblogdotcom

We would attempt to objectively assess the Israeli-Hamas war in its multiple objective and historical context, as opposed to the extant noisy conglomerate of crowd-roiling, populist mix of demanded “justice,” prejudice and inadequate information. The mathematical architecture of Euclidian Geometry would seem eminently suitable to such an approach. The dynamics of such rational discipline, call for a statement of the presenting problem and then proceeds by methodical deduction from universally established principles (“axioms”) to the theorem’s demonstrated solution. The steps are sequentially described as follows: Statement of the Proposition (or Problem), the relevant consideration of accepted postulates (Axioms) in logically deductive order, and finally, the logically resultant conclusion.

With the candid apology should any of our proffered postulates unwittingly, be colored by personal perception, we shall proceed to examine the multi-faceted dilemma in classic Euclidean style.

Problem: Israel’s justifiable military response to the surprise barbaric and genocidal attack and kidnap of hostages by Hamas, has had a devastatingly tragic impact on innocent Gaza Palestinians, apparently due to the arguable over-reactive policies of right-wing Benjamin Netanyahu. Outrage against such response has elicited loud public protests by America’s university students, some actually maintaining the relevance of the international crime of genocide.

GIVEN:

(Axiom 1)  The unjustified surprise attack by Hamas was pathologically barbaric and included murder, beheading of infants, torture and amputation of the elderly, rape and excision of women’s body parts, burning of occupied Israeli homes and the taking of hostages, Israeli and American. The expressly avowed purpose was the destruction of the State of Israel and its Jewish population.

(Axiom 2) Following the brutal assault, the Hamas terrorists, as planned, retreated to Gaza and with their kidnapped hostages took shelter in deep, well-supplied, underground tunnels, tactically constructed for such purpose, under Gaza’s Palestinian hospitals, and places of public assembly. The band of Hamas terrorists thus sheltered themselves from the predictable retribution by tactically and pathologically, causing the innocent population of Gaza, living on the surface, to serve as their shield. The canny Hamas terrorists, fully cognizant of Hamas’s inability to destroy Israel, militarily, sought, by such “shield” tactics to weaken the Jewish Nation in the eyes of world opinion, founded on the predictable retribution to be visited upon such Gaza hospitals and innocent Palestinians. Aided by the catalytic influence of the “Trumpish,” right-wing leadership of the flawed Benjamin Netanyahu, they apparently succeeded in such nefarious purpose.

(Axiom 3) History reveals the practice of anti-Semitism existing from the 4^th Century Holy Roman Empire under Emperor Constantine, to the multiple centuries of holy inquisitions and bigoted pogroms, enjoying its zenith in the wholesale slaughter of six million Jews. Unfortunately, such shameful proclivity continues to date. The purported and popular effective rationale, over the centuries for such perpetually cruel prejudice has been fictionally ubiquitous; “causing the plague,” “ruining the crops”, “poisoning the wells”, “drinking the blood of Christian children,” or more contemporaneously, “promoting communism” as well as its empirical opposite, “controlling the banks.” Such unwarranted, primordial stain on the Jewish ethnos has been replicated in a contemporary fictional reprise (not unlike “poisoning the wells,” or “despoiling the crops) consisting of alleged “genocide” against the Palestinian people ((N.B., by a Nation, having its origin (1948) as surviving victims of ultimate genocide during the Holocaust). It may be noted in such context, that in the terrorist attack, the flags of the terrorist movement, reportedly, contain the stated intertwined aspirations, “Death to Israel,” “Death to America.” The latter slogans are expressly and inarguably redolent of “genocide,” far more relevantly, perhaps, than Netanyahu’s cruel and unmitigated overreaction to the Hamas’ barbarous attack. To our understanding, the horrific crime of genocide requires the universal goal of the elimination of an ethnicity or nationality, such as in 1994 Rwanda when Hutu extremists killed 800,000 of the Tutsi minority, Serbia-Croatia, Turkey-Armenia, Nazis- Jews).

 (Axiom 4) Observably, Jewish Americans support the existence of the tiny Jewish State of Israel (albeit, at times, such as the present, oppose its current policies) but exclusively identify themselves as American citizens. The conflation of Jewish Americans with Israeli citizens is empirically erroneous and, at times, a utilitarian tool of anti-Semitism. Most mainstream American Jews, while in support of the State of Israel, oppose Netanyahu’s policy of unrestrained response and oppose its dire effects (tactically engineered by Hamas) on innocent Gaza Palestinian people.

(Axiom 5) Our readings and observation of University demonstrations and revolutionary actions, (more common in Europe), have resulted in the view that, despite the possible existence of a valid and compelling cause, such incidents are empirically relevant to the age of the protesters and their nascent level of experiential maturity. To young undergrads recently acquired or confirmed, metaphysical standards of propriety and justice, are, exclusively top of mind; in contrast to the enlightening benefit of more mature life experience, providing thoughtful consideration of the possible elements of exception, nuance, mitigation and, relevant personal background. Such protestors have proven to be easily catalyzed and influenced by outside interests, bearing their own nefarious agenda, (like anti-Semitism) unrelated to the rioters’ expressed demands. From an empirical standpoint, legitimate causes are better dealt with by nonviolent disruptive means; the latter, usually serving as a deterrent to rational consideration and possible resolution of the problem.

(Conclusion) Impulsive and violent student uprisings, albeit publically communicating perceived causes are societally and educationally disruptive, tactically manipulative by outside interests and are not, civilly, an effective nor appropriate catalyst for change which can only be attained by empirical reason.

Q.E.D.

-p.

Mother’s Day, the Nation’s gesture of salute and grateful recognition of that consequential member of the traditional family that gives birth to its children, changes diapers, wipes noses and occupies the significant office of partner, to the so-styled “Head of the Family.” The annual holiday, made official during the Presidency of Woodrow Wilson in 1914, is celebrated the on the second Sunday in May (this year, May 12, 2024). On that day, predictably, Mother will be the loved recipient of greeting cards, long-distance telephone calls and flowers (usually, roses or tulips) and sundry personal gifts. Often, her household chores and food preparation for the day will be undertaken by other family members.

On our thematic holiday, we express gratitude for the devoted performance of an overfull menu of chores and responsibilities which, functionally analogous to an effective epoxy, sustains the social architecture of the family unit. The Mother, perhaps, in addition to outside employment, is taxed with the responsibilities of a nurse, cook, and household manager in addition to the ubiquitous services inherent in childrearing. Most notably, Mom courageously performs the dangerous and existential service of giving birth to babies, the metaphysical precursors to the continuance of the human species.

Yet, remarkably, any cursory review of history will reveal that, contrary to granting them an empirically appropriate and well-deserved, rendition of gratitude and respect, women have eternally been relegated to an underprivileged and markedly subservient status, bizarrely inconsistent with their equal membership, and elemental service.

Until relatively recently, women could not legally vote, own property nor enter into written contracts. It is notable that an atavistic society finally granted freed male slaves the right to vote, but long before women were legally afforded the franchise. Society’s age-old grant of low status to women is often best shown in the inherent atavistic inclinations of religion, which have eternally, ascribed a subordinate position to Mother, which injustice persists to her forthcoming celebration.

The indisputable intent and signal purpose of the Founders of this Nation, as they often articulated, was the enforceable prevention of the newly created government from any interference with the rights of citizens to the free exercise of their nuanced belief. As clearly mandated in the “Establishment Clause,” of their promulgated Constitution, government may play no part, whatsoever, in citizens’ religious or secular thought or practice.

Notwithstanding the clear and understandable mandate of such Establishment Clause, the same has been violated by religious zealots on a number of occasions, but, thereafter, mercifully repealed or withdrawn, including, as illustrations, the Sunday Blue Laws, forbidding the conduct of business on the Christian Sabbath, and the Prohibition of Alcoholic Beverages. These instances are indicative of a signature myopic and timeless evangelical Christian disregard of the provisions of the constitution in aid of their religious beliefs. Painful history has demonstrated time and again, that religious beliefs, suitably expressed in Churches and other Houses of Worship, empirically lack universal concurrence. The Founders, in their wise and democratic intentions, had in mind the long and consistent history of horrendous misery, experienced in Europe due to monarchial or ecclesiastically established religion.

It may not be useful to again recount the worrisome facts relevant to the extant tenuous state of our republican democracy; exemplified by the perverse influence of the former President and would be dictator, Donald Trump, on his cultish (MAGA) populist horde. The latter has, inarguably, resulted in a disruption of the storied tradition of American liberty and its definitional way of life. Among other causation, self-interest based upon the perception of insecurity relating  the voting power of the numerous MAGA miscreants has completely undermined one of the Nation’s two political parties, populated SCOTUS with right-wing, religious and politically influenced Justices and as well, many legislators and officials. As a result of the ubiquitous right-wing promulgation of anti-democratic and Nazi-like policies, such as censorship and proscription of citizen rights, the mainstream American is currently, perhaps, desperately, hopeful of a resounding re-election of the incumbent, Joseph Biden and the exigent restoration of our invaluable constitutional democracy.

The just and appropriate restoration of our constitutional democracy would, of necessity, include the reinstatement of the legal right of women to obtain an abortion when needed. The right of privacy and personal sovereignty over their own body, legally confirmed by a half-century of legal precedent, (Roe v. Wade) has more recently been denied to women by the unconstitutional politically and religiously influenced, Justices of the Supreme Court (Dobbs decision); who were tactically inserted by the MAGA interests under the tutelage of their Pied Piper, the autocratic Donald Trump. Mainstream, traditional American citizens have merely to glance at the daily newspaper or attend the broadcast media, to obtain an understanding of the horrific human misery and tragic implications attendant upon this clearly fascistic intrusion into women’s lives.

The re-establishment of the woman’s right to her own bodily autonomy, specifically inclusive of her natural right to obtain an abortion, as opposed to the present un-American, fascistic intrusion thereon, would incomparably be a more loving and valued Mother’s Day gift than the most colorful flowers or the sweetest of chocolates.

-p.

[Prefatory Statement:For our present contextual purposes, we will begin this writing by reference to the initial advent of computer facility in accomplishing tasks formerly performed by real people. The exponential growth of computer technology appears to be matched by its societal eager acceptance, apparently, with little or no thought given to the positive value of prior human efficacy or to humanistic sentiment. In our view, a rational and balanced discussion on the latest achievement, “Artificial Intelligence,” is best done, accompanied by some comparative context.]

As we mundane, “non-nerds” understand it, “A.I.” describes computer systems capable of performing tasks that, historically, only humans can do, including,” reasoning,” making decisions and solving problems. Frankly speaking, we are concerned with the societal effects of eliminating the humanistic element in A.I. decision-making and action which, albeit more efficient and perhaps even more accurate, reductively exemplify efficiency and lack considerations of empathy and, mitigation or exception.

 Moreover, we question the efficacy of the term, (which to our mind is, definitionally, oxymoronic) since intelligence is, arguably, the product of Man’s evolved capacity for reason and not the (human) programmed product of insensate technology.

From the time that the human genre of “couch potato” discovered that he can switch his selection of television programs from wrestling to the weather, by the mere and effortless, touch of a “remote,” and avoid the personal trauma of standing up and walking a few steps, the facility of mechanically computerized devices saw an exponential growth in facility, and profits, and to our perception an existential decline in human interaction and personal initiative.

Regular readers of this blogspace are aware of our long-term concern and ardent opposition to the use of hand-held devices (“smartphones”) as a mode of interactive communication, as opposed to the more humanistic nuances of natural conversation, in person or by telephone, (not to mention the aesthetics and the accuracy of expression which are the unique features of written correspondence). The solitary, transmission of digital signals on another person’s lighted screen is answered in like fashion, whenever received. Efficiency and ease have, to society’s regret, been erroneously elected over necessary humanistic conversation.

We have read numerous newspaper and periodical observations, which, unfortunately, confirm our expressed concerns about the computerized mode of social interaction (conversation) and unhappily note the reports of widespread anxiety and depression among the young. As we are able to perceive, self-identity, self-image and personal autonomy are in great part, developed from the perception of the consistent reactions to us others; when this is minimized, emotional and mental troubles may well be the empirical result.

To be clear, we, affirmatively do not, in principle, oppose technical advancement. Untold human benefits have been enjoyed since the era of flint tools and wooden spearfishing. Life has exponentially improved and has become more enjoyable simultaneous with the development of mechanical tools, appliances, labor-saving developments, travel, and medical advances.  We unreservedly admire human ingenuity capable of the conception of new and improved facilities for problem-solving and ubiquitous improvement in the myriad facets of the human experience. What is concerning is the exercise of ingenuity for its own sake, or solely for profit, irresponsibly unconcerned with its potential effect on Man and his society. As demonstrated in the matter of cell phone interaction, exclusive consideration of perceived convenience can result in extremely harmful results.

Additionally worrisome is the unfortunate history of mankind’s historic misuse of developmental technology for unintended or nefarious purposes. The recent A.I. replication of President Biden’s voice and nuanced manner was falsely utilized in advising citizens not to vote in the recent primary elections. The realistic concern by screenwriters and actors that their creative work is capable of replication by A.I. is a realistic one. Additionally, we found ourselves nauseated to learn that classic sculptures created by the World’s historically renowned artists were machine replicable, using A.I. Such singular works of venerated artists should not be crassly relegated to the mundane status of mass-produced pottery.

Our worst nightmare consists of the chilling, indeterminate, and heartless danger presented by the use of A.I. directed military attack drones; the latter constituting additional and terrifying examples of the human inclination to pervert new developments for war and other nefarious purposes (as opposed to their intended, meteorological, land survey, environment protection, search and navigational purposes). A post-apocalyptic, terrifying movie might be produced in which all human beings have been eliminated yet eternal war is tactically continued by conflicting robotic fighter-bomber drones.

We firmly believe in freedom of enterprise and capitalistic initiative; nevertheless, it might be prudent to consider the establishment of a multi-disciplinary advisory board, analogous to the FDA (medicines), to review the possible societal impact and acceptability of newly developed, major technology.

-p.      

We begin this writing with a statement of appreciation for a measure of acquired insight derived from a recent review of two well-known children’s classics, “Grimm Brothers Fairy Tales” and “Tales of Hans Christian Anderson.” These readings furnished us with an analogous understanding of several, popularly known, human archetypes.  

We learned that the quintessential ogre exhibits two discreet varieties. The first is stereotypically male, dwarf or giant-sized, often demonstrating a protuberant, bulbous nose, big intense fiery eyes, larger-than-life ears, short arms, and wears boots; sometimes (most especially in the Norwegian genre) additionally evincing a large toothy grimace. This genre, by reason of its facile identifiability, is significantly less treacherous than its surreptitious comparative. Notably, there exists a small minority of this discreet population of ogre that, notwithstanding their terrifying external appearance, evince a benevolent, and even on occasion, a loving disposition (example, leprechauns).

The second, and, notably, the most numerous genre of ogre, (exemplified by the specific subject of this writing) is predictably, dangerous, malevolent, and entirely lacking in sentiment or empathy. As stated, this category, by contrast, is not characterized by the easily recognizable grotesque image of the described fairy tale ogre, but rather, possesses an initial disarming and insidious, human countenance. As a consequence, its potential for toxic wrongdoing is more insidious and destructive.

Our thematic protagonist, a member of the second variety and, accordingly, not immediately identifiable as an ogre, is the orange-haired member of the species, Donald J. Trump. Unlike the etiology of the fairy storybook ogre, the Trump variety of ogre (viz., the second ogre configuration) generally, does not owe its advent to a traditional witch’s spell. The nuanced etiology of our chosen ogre is endemically developmental and systemically, self-generated.

Our protagonist exhibits the usual, perverse cornucopia of traits common to the second genre of (normal appearing) ogres, but, in addition, as a singularly nuanced feature, perceives the world and his immediate environment with entirely autonomous and self-interested lenses. The Trump ogre maintains the reductive ideation that matters of importance are exclusively those that are seen to affect him and his personalized fantasies. Any degree of rational analysis of the horrific effect of this ogre’s bizarre elevation to the omnipotent American Presidency and his incapable and self-interested performance will find it comparable to the proverbial fox, taxed with the duty of protection of guarding the hen house.

One can, presumably conceive the development of his systemic persona, starting as an “infant terrible” who might violently kick his mother in the shins, fully cognizant of the predictable punitive response, overridden by his insatiable need for immediate and exclusive attention. Such self-centered, childish immaturity appears to have chronically persisted in this 73-year-old autocratic ogre to whose perception, public admiration and acknowledged loyalty are, life-sustaining matters similar to food and drink.

In service to his insatiable appetite for admiration and perceived success, Trump, has self-interestedly committed an overly full, unattended, dumpster, (Trumpster?) of odious and blatantly criminal acts. (See prior writings for particulars).  Stated briefly, our thematic ogre has been indicted for 91 felonies ranging from pay-offs to prostitutes and tax fraud to treason and the incitement of an insurrection As an aggravating feature, he has engaged in anti-democratic demagoguery, demanding, among other autocratically perverse statements, the scrapping of the Constitution and declaring that, if given a second term as Chief Executive, he would be a “Dictator.”

However, in our view, the most revelatory and demonstrative act of his perverse persona, albeit non-criminal, was his televised mimicking, vocally and physically, of a questioning media reporter, visibly afflicted with the unsightly tremors and physical disabilities of cerebral palsy. Such a clownish, pathological performance can be attributed only to the cruelest and pathological of ogres.

A modicum of credit, however, is due to this ogre (and obnoxious adult-mauvais enfant) for having ultimately succeeded in attaining his neurotic-childish goal of attracting attention. One cannot turn to the television media, irrespective of time or selected channel, with any prospect of avoiding his visage, accompanied by an intense discussion (usually negative) relating to his most current travesty. It may be observed that, in this respect, the purported “success” (viz., attention) eternally boasted by this ogre is singularly accurate.

It is unquestionably of primary and existential importance to the continuance of our Democratic Republic, that Donald J. Trump a/k/a “the Orange Ogre,” be defeated as the Republican candidate for the Presidency. To us, of secondary, but exigent, importance is the ridding of his incessantly broadcasted image and seedy soap opera from our daily lives.

* [Thanks to Dian Fosse for the amended use of her story name, “Gorillas in the Mist.”]

-p.

---

 

The acerbic dilemma concerning barking dogs who vigorously chase after cars recites, “What do they do if they catch one?” The analogous, unjust, and ill-advised reversal by SCOTUS, of the half-century of legal precedent, affirming a woman’s right to an abortion, long sought by conservative and religious interests, provides the answer. In reality, the egregiously inhumane reversal of this innate, private right of American women, vigorously protested by the preponderance of the Nation, constitutes but a pyrrhic victory for those who had doggedly pursued such a result. Continuing with the analogical reference, the subject canine, who, after much strenuous effort, at last, caught up with the car was greatly perplexed by the result. The elimination of citizen rights, as opposed to their historically constitutional protection, effected an observably sizeable shift in America’s deep tectonic plates.

The direct result of the draconian decision, as might well have been foreseen, were legions of heart-breaking, and life-threatening medical scenarios. The ensuing, widespread, outrage expressed by female and right-thinking male citizens, responsive to said autocratic elimination of the relevant right, and its hazardous effects, led to the fear of an ominous voting threat to its publicly elected proponents. To reprise the analogous reference: the dog ultimately caught up with the car but was dismayed and disillusioned by the effects of his victory. It is not surprising that the duplicitous Donald J. Trump, who at first, tactically asserted full credit for the reversal of the precedential, Roe v. Wade, upon being apprised of the vast negative public response, tempered his political dialogue to thereafter suggest that the legality of abortion should be “left to the (determination of) the States.” Within days, the Arizona State Legislature responsively and atavistically resurrected an antique, Civil War era Statute (1864), which criminalized abortion, legislated during the Presidency of Abraham Lincoln, when pre-State Arizona was just a sparsely inhabited “Territory.”

In our view, there are three relevant categories of moral and political concern: (1) the atavistic continuation of centuries of legal and societal inequity practiced against women, (2) the unconstitutional infusion of proscribed religious dogma into the law of the Nation, and, (3) the ignorant compliance of certain Americans with the perverse effort by Trump to downgrade our venerable Democratic Republic to the dreaded state of autocracy. Given the overabundance of appropriately relevant comments, we will briefly summarize the salient points.

• White women did not receive the legal right to vote until 1920; it took another 45 years to enshrine “all” women with the franchise (Voting Rights Act, 1965). Notably, men who were former Black slaves were afforded the right to vote back in 1869 (15^th Amendment).
  Until rather recently, women were legally proscribed from owning property or personally entering into a legal contract.
• Although manifestly prohibited by the Constitution, which expressly provides that the Nation was to be governed by secular principles (“Separation of church and [viz., from] State” the foundational principle has often been egregiously violated (viz., Prohibition, Sabbath Blue Laws, Courtroom Attestation on the Bible, Religious motto on paper money and coins as well as on municipal buildings, the updated language of the pledge to the flag, and contextually and most harmfully, in the thematic withdrawal of the High Court’s precedential confirmation of a woman’s right to abortion.  The state of pregnancy has been determined to be diagnosable as a dangerous condition and vitally requires medical care. The subject prohibition of medically necessary abortion and the draconic and irrational criminalization of professional medical providers is irrational, cruel, and in our view, no less than fascistic.
• The misguided cooperation of the lemming-like MAGA populists, under the cultish influence of the declared, would-be autocrat, Donald J. Trump, in the trashing of the Constitution and with it its provisions ensuring citizen’s rights against trespass by government, is irrational and suicidal. The convincing logical deduction, that it is “control,” and not abortion, or, ”life” that, ultimately
  provides their underlying motivation, is empirically demonstrated, by the eternally inconsistent objection of such purported fetus guardians ( “Pro-Life”) to contraceptive birth control and, revealingly, to governmental assistance to needy children (i.e., after birth).

It is vitally important that mainstream American citizens do not, reductively, limit the present precarious state of our democracy, singularly, to the despicable Presidential candidate (Trump has ominously declared that if elected, he will be a dictator) one must take into consideration the millions of (misguided) voters who had once successfully elected him, rather than the more pragmatic and rational choice of Hillary Clinton. It is also telling that Trump has the affirmative and tactical support of Putin and, apparently, certain other foreign autocratic ogres.

This existential menace to democracy and societal civility must be defeated by, when appropriate, vigorously extolling democratic aspirational thought and, of course, casting our votes consistent with the preservation of our unique Democratic Republic.

As we observed in an earlier essay, the next Presidential election may uniquely present a notable and bizarrely less impactful choice as to who is successfully elected, than who is not.

-p.

---

 

For a magical moment on the late afternoon of April 8, 2024, all of Natural Evolution’s marvel, Homo sapiens, inhabiting the surface of Planet Earth from Mexico to Maine, witnessed the confirmation of the declarations of Copernicus, Galileo, and Miss Posnanski (our 4^th Grade Public School Teacher) concerning the heliotropic architecture and dynamics of our Solar System.  Humankind of every stripe, set aside their cups of coffee, books, microscopes, and soup ladles to witness the awe-inspiring, bizarre occurrence of the brief period of “nighttime,” imposed upon the brightly lit afternoon.

The dramatic nature of this startling heliocentric drama has eternally been a subject of fascination, terror, myth, and religious interpretation. Primitive peoples maintained various folk beliefs concerning lunar eclipses. On the American Continent, the Choctaw Nation believed that the Moon was being eaten by hungry large black squirrels and would shoot arrows, throw spears, and shout at it to make it stop. The Navajos saw it as the start of a new year. Elsewhere, the ancient Greeks believed it to be a sign of anger of the Gods. Ancient Australians believed that the total eclipse was an intimate event during which the Moon mounted the Sun. Notably, the modern, scientific understanding of the solar phenomenon seems not to have detracted from its universal fascination and the empirical recognition that such “Moon Shadows” are only a fleeting phenomenon and manifestly, not a threatening omen.

It is, however, our considered view that from the humanistic context, the significance of Man’s scientific and rational understanding of the lunar eclipse may beneficially be outweighed by its temporal, salutary effect on Mankind.

Our view has validity through its observably diverting effect on the chronic, ethnocentric, racial, sexual, and ethnic hatred that characterizes many earthlings (human beings); presumably, based on ignorance and inexperience with, and consequent reductive fear, of natural human diversity. Thematically, it is the temporal amelioration of, or diversion from this condition to which we assign a salubrious effect to the planetary phenomenon. The dark, macabre, and fearsome occurrence empirically, functions as a universal “time out,” or a temporary oasis of reprieve, not merely from the problems and responsibilities of our daily existence but, contextually and beneficially, by the focused unanimity of the entire human family, inclusive of the rich and poor, young and old, white and black, and, inclusively, otherwise. If the event were to pose an existential danger to the Planet, it was a universally inclusive danger; if the outer space players were performing properly, they were properly performing for all humankind, on a universal basis, irrespective of color of skin, ethnicity or otherwise.

It may well behoove all right-thinking Earthlings to devise some sort of regularly occurring earthly version of the “Moon Shadow” phenomenon, with the capacity to remind all human inhabitants, whenever needed, that Natural Evolution created all the iterations of its advanced sentient species, Homo sapiens, from the same mold.

-p.   

Despite an admitted lack of education or training in the discipline of our present theme, our empirical experience, nevertheless, has indicated that to the extent an individual is removed from the state of reality orientation, can he, permissibly, be considered societally aberrant or insane.  We find ourselves reluctantly and alarmingly obliged, in candor, to observe the remarkable profusion of such derangement in our contemporary American society. We would further hazard the opinion that the malady can attribute its appearance and corruptive metastasis to a combination of natural inclination and an experienced incentive to reject reality in favor of facts, deemed consistent with disparate, but felt “preferable” ideation.

We would not grant the exclusivity of a proprietary patent for such subjective or tactical rejection of empirical reality to the meretricious ingenuity of Donald J. Trump; but would award him the gold medal for its efficient, evangelical proselytization. Trump’s bizarrely successful, autocratic promotion of “alternate facts” appears to have attained the status of a virulent toxic pandemic, and still serves as a universal credo for his multitudinous, cultish following. From the advent of his public appearance on the political stage, Trump tactically, and in some quarters, successfully devalued factual reality and denigrated the validity of the responsible media and the findings of the academic World; in preference to subjectively acceptable falsity, consistent with his egoistic self-interest. Such would-be autocrat, by unfortunate chance, having somehow been gifted with skill in snake oil merchandising, tactically utilized said demagogic skills in the achievement of adulation from the Nation’s eternally discontented and unenlightened populist bloc of citizens; and, of most impact, the perceived potential of their votes.

It was but a small step from “alternative facts” and “alternate reality” to the emergence of paranoid conspiratorial ideations of the sycophantic Trump supporters. Thus the Nation experienced irrational proclamations ranging from, a “rigged election,” tiny tracking micro-computers in vaccines,  rockets sent down from the atmosphere by Israel, the Trade Center attack being seen as a government-friendly flag operation, bamboo implants in ballots altering votes,  Jews (only 2% of the population) replacing white  Christian citizens, George Soros being part of a worldwide, Jewish banking conspiracy to control the Planet, the relegation  of “Climate Warming”  to “a conceived meme of the “coastal elite,” to the insanity of “Pizzagate.” The range of paranoid conspiratorial ideations has proven to be limitless.

It is the identical, elected irrationality, as observed, that predictably denies established historical reality in favor of a preferred version or perhaps, a complete erasure, more comfortable or commensurate with the intransigent tropes of the fact-denier (predictably, right-wing).  A glaring example of such a lack of reality orientation or, denial of reality, may be observed in the instances of demands for the deletion from education of America’s “Original Sin,” the evil and inhuman practice of black chattel slavery.

 A substantial portion of our Nation’s bigoted citizens adamantly oppose the teaching of the Nation’s shameful history of black chattel slavery. Such aberration includes the elimination of “CRT” (Critical Race Teaching) from the universal school curricula and the banning of books and educational sources relevant to the period. This education-disabling impediment is an especially notable extension of reality denial and, effectively constitutes a roadblock to the acquisition of an honest and objective education. The utilitarian study of historical National mistakes is empirically useful in avoiding them in the future. Equally, or perhaps more important, is the preservation of the assumption of the accuracy of the content and consequent trust and enlightenment derived from a society’s truthful and beneficial education. Abridged history is deceitful, useless, and not, candidly, “History.” The latter truism has far less significance to our thematic fact denier than his unsupported, intransigent beliefs and attempts at the perpetuation of his subjectively preferred false historical and political dogma.

Such factually deranged dynamic attained the level of “Beyond the Pale,” [please excuse the eventually realized pun] status through a certain recently expressed and bewildering ideation, relative to race relations. Considering the historical context of the Nation’s continuing and necessary attempts to attain appropriate equality for its black citizens (including, the elimination of voter interference and statutorily and judicially, proscribing prejudice in employment, housing, criminal justice, finance, housing, education, and elsewhere), the bizarre statements of the perverse, “Adolph  Eichmann-like reincarnation, Steven Miller and others of his perverse ilk, attained record depths of reality disorientation (whether tactical or believed) by the bizarre declaration that the present state of American law is “prejudicial to white citizens.” Any sentient Homo sapiens within arm’s reach of the plethora of sources of National media would afford that statement the same degree of reality orientation and verisimilitude, as a declaration that television’s Mr. Rogers was an “Isis Terrorist,” or that Broadway’s “Zabars” is a launching platform for military intercontinental missiles.

A reality-oriented and well-deliberated Presidential vote, next November, will assure existential importance to the endurance of our unique Republican Democracy and, additionally, beneficially serve as an empirically, necessary, boon to citizen sanity.

-p.  
      

There has eternally existed in the legislated dynamics of our Nation’s avowed democracy, an inescapable cognitive dissonance relative to its foundational principle of universal citizen equality. The trope: “A Nation by, and for the People,” and the latter’s implementing dynamic “One man, one vote,” are, both  logically and empirically, at factual and philosophical odds with the disparate existence of the constitutionally established, intervening undemocratic filter designated as, “The Electoral College.”

American history relates that the institution of the Electoral College resulted from a compromise between the concept of the election of an American President by Congressional vote and his election by popular vote. The impact of the provision has the insincere result such that when a citizen votes for his choice of President he, misleadingly, is voting for the candidate’s State’s Elector. The undemocratic result is that the candidate, empirically, receiving the most votes (the legitimate choice of the Nation’s franchise) may nevertheless lose, by virtue of the arbitrarily assigned quantum of State electors.

Nor is the observation of this undemocratic flaw a conceptual or theoretical issue. The historical record reveals no less than five instances in which a Presidential candidate concededly won the popular vote, i.e., the expressed will of the people but lost because of the arithmetic configuration of State Electors: (1) Andrew Jackson over Rutherford B. Hayes over Samuel Tilden, (2) Benjamin Harrison over Grover Cleveland, (3) Benjamin Harrison over Grover Cleveland, (4) George Bush over Al Gore, and (5) Donald J. Trump over Hillary Clinton.

 N.B. [As an intriguing aside, one might wistfully imagine the absence of the currently presenting egregious and hazardous threat to our democracy, if the popular vote, in the case of “(5)” were, appropriately determinative].

We would, appropriately and energetically, award the highest kudos to all citizens and public-spirited organizations, taxed with the admirable effort to establish an effective and definitional democracy, by opposing election denial, gerrymandering, voter interference, and voter exclusion. Nevertheless, consistent with the definitional dynamics and moral conception of “Democracy,” we would recommend an existentially needed, constitutional amendment, eliminating, at long last, the Electoral College, an unnecessary, and unjust roadblock to true representative democracy.

-p. 

The highly venerated Hebrew Rabbi, Hillel, famously declared: “If I am not for myself, who will be? If I am only for myself, what am I, and if not now, when?

The renowned, classic Persian poet, Rumi, similarly, in his aesthetic metaphysical statement: “You are not a mere drop in the vast Ocean. You are the vast Ocean in a drop.” Thus, also affirming the primal significance of the individual.

Mainstream American citizens have been obliged by an abundance of inarguably evident warning signs to, affirmatively, open their eyes to the alarming similarities between the would-be autocrat, Donald Trump, next November’s candidate for re-election to the American Presidency, and the former Nazi dictator, Adolph Hitler, as well as the contemporary tyrants, Vladimir Putin, Li Jim Ping, Victor Orban, and Kim Jong-un. Augmenting the empirically, justified fear and predictable danger, are his express and unashamed, public statements of his intention to be a dictator.

Donald Trump has been successful, for enigmatic reasons, lost in the impenetrable mists of irrationality, in installing himself, by manipulation and tactical strategies, as the messianic leader of a large horde of populist sycophants (cult members), detached from the traditional American society.

The perceived, impact of the voting power of such a large underbelly of the Nation, under the sway of the orange demagogic “snake oil” salesman, has cowed into submission many public officials and government officeholders. To add more firewood to the extant conflagration are his public statements of intention, to be a dictator, to “seek retribution against his political enemies,” to stop the flow of immigrant “animals” and to halt the “poisoning of our blood,” the latter, reminiscent of the hateful statements of Adolph Hitler and existentially terrifying.

To further (assuming, it is necessary) demonstrate the mortal danger to our American Democracy, is the politically inspired impotence of the Nation’s foundational tri-partite architecture, constitutionally created to ensure democracy by exercising its established supervisory duty of “checks and balances.”  Such transmogrifying effects have rendered our House of Representatives, the entire Republican Party, and most disappointingly, the Nation’s Supreme Court, politically corruptible or functionally impotent.

The profound nature of the undemocratic quagmire in which our Nation finds itself deeply mired existentially makes incumbent that the responsibility for the restoration of its status as the historical avatar of democratic rule, societal propriety, and human justice, upon our dedicated and enlightened citizens. The capacity of dedicated and enlightened, individual citizens of a Nation, when called upon, to peaceably and effectively restore justice and societal propriety has been historically demonstrated.

 Irrespective of one’s nuanced political inclination, the coming Presidential election will exigently concern, notably, less the traditional choice of a perceived better candidate, but rather and more impactful, who the candidate isn’t. An autocrat who has once before sought to eliminate the constitution and the moral rule of law, given the opportunity presented by a second term, would predictably eradicate our traditionally American way of life.

 Unlike the batting regimen in baseball, upon the delivery of such a second strike (i.e., a Trump second term of office) the Nation (democracy) is tragically, and helplessly, “out.”

-p.

The recent tragic death of the retired four-term Connecticut Senator, Joseph Lieberman, seemed to have provided the personal impetus for the present expression of a long-contemplated theme articulated in this mini-essay. More specifically and accurately, it was, as reported, the appalling cause of his death, viz., “From a fall, in his home.”

The statistics notably reveal that falls are the number one cause of death for the elderly. When young children fall during play, they are up in a moment, usually, none the worse for wear. However, by empirical contrast, the risks and consequences of falls in the case of the elderly are incomparably, more serious. With aging comes the loss of physical strength, conditioning, and balance. [To take the liberty of expressing a personal, anecdotal, and relevant note, our mother passed away shortly after a fall which caused a fracture to her thigh.]

The Greek classic “Riddle of the Sphinx,” can be perceived as contextually relevant. The apocryphal Oedipus, arriving at Thebes, was confronted with solving a presented, life-determining enigma, “What has four legs in the morning, two legs in the afternoon, and three legs in the evening? Sophocles’ protagonist, not in the least exemplified by the paucity of reason, replied, “Man.” For those readers who lack the facility of the iteration of the ancient Greek language, the solution to the riddle was thoughtfully answered by the apocryphal Greek King, as,” Man.” (i.e., who crawls as a baby, stands on two legs as an adult, and walks with a stick in old age). The context of the present writing is centered on the emotionally self-deprecating, and ego-altering, personal dependence on the “stick.”

Man’s aged scenario of the “stick,” is one, featuring the gamut of ambulatory paraphernalia, the cane, the walker, (three or four-wheeled), and, as needed, the wheelchair. The recognized physical need for such auxiliary support props makes existentially necessary, a substantive re-adjustment of one’s former self-image and reliable assurance of normal capability and an uncomfortable reassessment of previous assumptions of agency. We feel qualified to make such observations on this age-normal, phenomenon, based upon our present ambulatory dependence on a (three-wheeled) walker, not to omit the available, ego-altering, but pragmatically fortuitous, assistance when needed, of a devoted spouse.

One is pragmatically obliged to strive, on a rational and mature basis, when timely, to personally acquire a mature acceptance and accommodation with said eternal phenomena of aging, the consequential result of a lifetime’s toll on muscles, joints, and other well-used facilities of human physiology. However, the latter “metamorphic” developments would be significantly more acceptable to the aging individual if they were not universally accompanied by the ever-present danger and ominous prospect of a possible precipitous fall and consequent injury.

Humanistic and pragmatic consideration of the civic promotion of universally more secure and enjoyable longevity, would suggest the passage of a beneficial, public-spirited, and well-deserved legislative amendment, or “carve out,” regarding the application of the Law of Gravity, as applicable to the elderly citizen; at a very minimum in the environs of his own home.

-p.