Author: plinyblogcom

A long-overdue investigatory light switch has finally been flipped on in the dark, murky, Washington offices, causing its currently resident insects to panic and scurry in all directions for cover. These have, indeed, been unprecedented and dark days for the nation, surely unforeseen by our founders.

Shocking and unpredicted election returns resulted in the elevation of an incompetent, egotistical and totally unfit candidate to the Oval Office; an ignorant autocrat who has chosen to surround himself with malevolent advisors; who has appointed a cabinet of self-interested “Secretaries” who are ignorant of, or even opposed to, the historically designated responsibilities of their appointed departments. As a logically expected consequence, citizen feelings of security and confidence are seriously lacking, in our government’s stewardship of both domestic and foreign affairs.

How did we get here? How, and why did the traditional and dedicated bright light of dutiful and dedicated service and the assumed propriety of governmental operations get switched off?

We suggest that the answers to these poignant questions are as follows. The empirical existence of a large population of poorly educated, unaware and disaffected citizens, plus the recent availability of unlimited campaign funds. The latter financed Trump’s tactical program of mendacious promises, targeted to such discontented, low information and impressionable voters. Moreover, considering the reported low vote of the opposition, (apparently disinterested in Trump’s opponent) the outcome, in retrospect, might seem somewhat less shocking. But, where did such unlimited funds for the support of the Trump campaign come from?

Based upon the fundamental, Constitutional architecture of governance of our democratic republic, designed and built by our founding fathers, the most essential concept was denominated “The Separation of Powers.” The Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches were to be independent of each other, and respectively, exercise “checks and balances” when required upon the other. Unexplainably, the Supreme Court of The United States (“SCOTUS”), has recently unprecedently and unexpectedly, thrown a wooden shoe (“sabot”) into the well- conceived and well- functioning governmental mechanism, damaging (sabotaging) our successfully operating democracy.

The black letter precedential requirement of SCOTUS, [since its establishment] eternally was, that no case may be accepted for consideration which contains a legal issue. The meritorious reason for the forbearance, is the preservation and protection of the fundamental Constitutional requirement of the Separation of Powers. Indeed, SCOTUS has, over the years, refused to accept a great many cases, where it was felt that the impact of its decision might (even remotely) affect an extant political issue. The timeless procedural prerequisite for the acceptance of any case by SCOTUS, is and has always been, the initial filing of a proceeding called an “application for certiorari” to judicially assure the complete absence of any political issue, directly, or by indirect impact, in the case for which acceptance is sought.

At any rate, such was the unshakeable precedent until, GORE v. BUSH, wherein, shockingly, the Court chose to politically affect the outcome of a contested Presidential election. We, as serious observers of the law, were confused and disappointed by the acceptance and the ruling of, said case.  Even more confusing and by precedent egregious, was the manifestly political case, known as “Citizen’s United,” which was also wrongfully accepted and decided by SCOTUS. The high Court seemed to go bizarrely out of its way, in once more, bypassing its own historical accepted precedent, and as well, astonishingly, frustrating the body of the substantive law in its disappointing  and irrational holding. SCOTUS, in its wisdom, ruled that a “corporation” is a “person” and as such, has the First Amendment right (Freedom of Speech) to contribute as much money as it desires to an election. [ Henny Penny, this time the sky is now undoubtedly falling!]

Every law school freshman (and no doubt, every informed entrepreneur) knows, that a corporation is but a fictional legal entity (the concept, existing since its creation by England’s Victorian Parliament Corporation Act), privately formed, specifically, to afford “limited liability” to entrepreneurs. The corporate entity permits one to do business in the name of a fictional “person,” the corporation, itself; which entity can be sued, or sue in its (registered) corporate name. The corporation has legally been a purely fictional “person” solely existing and recognized for this specific and limited, commercial purpose. It most assuredly, does not have existence in any other respect or for any other purpose; certainly not let as a living and breathing citizen with Constitutional rights. Since every law school freshman knows this, one can safely assume that it is known by our highest Court. This conundrum was observed in a very early post (“WHERE YOU AT, SCOTUS?” Vol.1, “Reflections” p.5) where the reasoning of the Court was earlier questioned.

Inarguably, the influence of big money in politics, persists as a critical pathology to democracy and the body politic; the, irresponsibly granted, legal franchise to donate unlimited funds to an election, is the advanced, infiltrating metastasis of that pathology, predictably fatal to the existence of any Republican Democracy.

-p.

As stated in the preceding post, we have taken upon ourselves the exercise of a felt responsibility to closely analyze and evaluate, frequently used, but possibly misapprehended, words. In post 270, we sought to resurrect the downplayed and unappreciated noun “repetition” and its adjectival cousin, “repetitive”; the latter customarily summoning up the image of an unprepared, or boring speaker, but in contrast, representing a universal, vital, even existential, phenomenon. As stated, the inspiration for the previous post, having been the experience of being at the seaside and again observing the reiterative movement of the ocean.

In the present note, in keeping with our chosen responsibility, we seek to explore and closely analyze the popularly used, and much lauded, word “tolerance.” The innocent and well -intended perception  the word, ordinarily signifies the commendable quality of understanding and even- handed attitude towards  “others”. For this reason, prior to the expression of our unorthodox remarks regarding such popularly laudable term, we would ask the reader to kindly withhold his reaction to what may be perceived as an injudicious or unorthodox evaluation of the word.

To get immediately to the point, we feel that the only word in the American-English lexicon worse than the word, “tolerant,” is the word, “intolerant.”

A summary consensus of consulted sources, describes the meaning of “tolerant,” as amounting to the fair, objective and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, beliefs, practices, race*and ethnos are different from one’s own. Sounds acceptable, but it is not nearly acceptable enough.

We most strenuously object to the use of the language which signifies forbearance, and the unabashed presumption expressed the basic concept. A necessary corollary to the definition (and use) of the word, is the implied assumption, that such a “tolerant” person has the (social or political) standing, or implicit  authority, to discretionarily grant or withhold, such permission or forbearance, but, in fact, refrains from denial of such grace because he is virtuous. At the very best, it can have a modicum of value if seen as a preliminary step toward the goal, which is acceptance, albeit clumsy and presumptuous.

The word encompasses unjustified and undeserved self-praise, earned by such forbearance; it is inarguably arrogant, unattractively self-satisfying and clearly bigoted. Put in simple terms. The word is understood to denote right thinking but does not. We may well need another vocabulary word.

There are no set standards for being or thinking, and no existing authority for their creation; therefore, there is no “other way.” Such a conception is at best, ignorant and ethnocentric, at worst, prejudiced. The term “tolerant” which necessarily encompasses the award or personal impression of self-praise for the withholding of action or criticism is arrogant and hubris, and amounts to implicit prejudice; in fact, it is worse than the despicable word “bigot,” which, at least, carries no undeserved illusion of self-praise.

The rational and hopefully attainable goal, is universal sincere and unhesitating mutual acceptance, if not firm friendship. Until the arrival of that remarkable day in the march towards mankind’s moral evolution, it would seem appropriate to extol those who practice right thinking, above those who exult in repressed bigotry.

*We have excised the word “race” from the plinyblog vocabulary; it is scientifically flawed, and is consistently used for unacceptable purposes.

-p.

Despite the commonly understood function of language as the symbolic representation of actions or ideas, we find from time to time, that such functional intention is not sufficiently, or satisfactorily, accomplished. As noted in past posts, we have taken upon ourselves the responsibility, to attempt to redeem, as felt, the true intrinsic value of selected words, or to the contrary, their insidious connotation.

An illustrative example of one such undervalued word is the noun “repetitive” and its adjectival nephew, “repetitive.” In common parlance, the word ordinarily carries a negative suggestion; at lectures, it may invite a perception of the speaker’s lack of adequate preparation, or worse, his disrespect for the assembled audience. The annoying observation of repetitiveness, may also have potential for extreme annoyance (at the perceived speaker’s notion that the audience lacks sufficient understanding, or, the sense of abuse of the bored and captive listener).

The intended theme of this post is the demonstration that the common use of our subject word, “repetitive,” is not fully representative of the extent of its wide application and potential dimension and its vital role in the dynamics of our lives and, perforce, the continued existence of our residential planet.

While at the shore in Guadeloupe, observing the” Texas two Step” style, ebb and flow of the Atlantic Ocean, an epiphany of sorts, was realized; a sudden sense of renewed appreciation of the immense scope and, in fact, the existential importance, of the dynamic of repetition. Aside from the sea’s great beauty, the predictable regular and repetitive motion of the waters, furnishes profoundly comforting evidence and assurance, of a properly functioning planet.

Simultaneously, there was an appearance of a gaggle of conceptual thoughts, associated with the sea’s repetitive action, among which was the realization that the witnessed body of water has been performing its repetitious dance, since a time long prior to the advent of mankind. There was the renewed realization that the ocean has been credited with being the nursery for all earthly life; which latter consideration has the potential for summoning up unconscious, innate feelings of origin, and is arguably, responsible for the presence, in general, of so many vacationers at the seashore.

The sea visibly performing its untiring, repetitive terpsichory, on an eternal basis, symbolizes the reality that “repetition,” singularly, constitutes an assurance of existence and continuing life; the regular and repetitive performance of our heart, internal organs and senses, akin to the ocean tides, is such an objective assurance and the criterion for health professionals. Repetitive outcomes are sought in the entire universe of scientific research and investigative studies. The processes of new learning, of reason and of human interaction ( business and social), mandate predictable and repetitive behavior; but do we repeat ourselves excessively? Alors! Vive, la mot “repetition”!

The moving seaside at Gwada*, reminded us that our lives, physically and sociologically, are truly beholden to the dynamic of “repetition;” a crucially vital phenomenon and as well, a truly impressive word.

*(French Creole for “Guadeloupe”)

-p.

Our occasional airplane travel, unfailingly, produces in us a remarkable manifestation. The mere act of  entry into the cavernous flying container, seems to reliably, presage in us, an altered sense of reality. On settling in and fastening (belting) ourselves to our assigned seat, we at once realize, that we are a hapless number in a veritable ark of fellow adventurers; and that we are now completely dependent upon persons and events over, whom and which, we have absolutely no participation or control. Yet, this identical experience having always proved successful in the past, we confidently, submit our lives and packages to the capably skillful pilots and the eternally smiling crew. Thereafter, one has nothing to do but think; and may be one of the factors underlying the phenomenon on which we base our present theme.

An intensively separate, introspective focus seems to evolve, despite the presence of other people in one’s traveling party and the fellow passengers of the cavernous winged leviathan. We entertain the perception that we are now resuming our personal, private conversation, at the point where it was left off, at the prior flight experience. We pick up the familiar enhanced focus employed on recent such adventures, and seem to continue the audit, or taking stock, of the current progress of our lives, bringing such internal observations up to date, hopefully, with a more experienced perspective.

This re-visited sense of separateness and such enhanced  focus, is readily distinguishable from the sense of being alone. We are among several others, who similarly, may be in concentrated and undisturbed contact with their inner selves. Our judgments and observations in this state, are distinguishably not based upon empirical events as they may occur in contemporary time, but rather reside in an aeronautical style meditation, concerning our recollected past experiences and past responses to stimuli.

We have pondered on the etiology of this (aeronautical)  state of deliberation and cognition  and attribute it to one, or more of the following: (1)  as stated above, the complete surrender of independent action, as an airline passenger or, (2) the hypnotic and monotonous drone of the engines, or, (3) the realization that, incredibly, we are comfortably sipping our beverage at 40,000 feet from the surface of the earth or, (4) the magical experience of motionless sitting, and later emerging, “twilight zone fashion,” from the vessel, at a distant point on the globe, or (5) even the (repressed) realization that any serious mishap, mechanical or meteorological, can have mortal consequence.

Upon the plane’s arrival and landing, we resume our customary patterns of thought, but some instinctive message seems to insinuate itself: “See you next time.”

-p.

As observed in a recent post, with all media attention focused upon our adolescent, publicity craving President, effectively providing a total diversion, the spotlight appears not to be shone upon the unnoticed and reprehensible elimination of many of our citizen rights and entitlements. We however felt compelled, as a matter of crucial priority, to emphasize the most compelling subject among those previously detailed, as being overshadowed by such distraction.

It is inarguable that this summer season has, consistently, been abnormally hot and humid. This unusual summer season, as we are aware, was preceded by ominously strange and unprecedented seasons; the climate having presented unseasonably cold or hot days which were truly irregular and completely unpredictable. Our great fear is that, at present, we are no longer enabled to prevent catastrophic climate change, but are now experiencing its actual, dreaded and predicted onset.

Last night we, (who usually have meaningless or forgotten dreams), dreamt that planet Earth, by reason of the extensive and steady pollution of its air, water and atmosphere, was in an irreversible and uncontrollable process of decay, and on a gradual march toward morphing from a verdant, life sustaining planet, to a cold, lifeless, dry rock, like the moon. The general sense, as remembered, was that the moon itself once had been, in its far distant past, a living and fertile, planet.

This chilling nightmare provided the impetus to again write about the thoughtless ignorance of citizens who have chosen to be “climate deniers” and the criminal negligence of the many short-sighted industrialists, who value profits at a higher priority than life. It seems either suicidal or completely irrational, to deny the presenting symptoms of irreparable damage to our planet and to the life and health of its inhabitants. Practically every climate scientist, nationally and internationally, is in full accord on this dangerous subject. Citizens without expertise on the subject, arbitrarily and adamantly choose to deny the consistent findings of so many reputable scientists. A frustrating explanation may perhaps be found in the neurotic practice of “tribal” voting, as dealt with in an earlier post; a practice in which insecure people perceive that they have attained acceptance and identity by means of communally sharing mutually identical positions regarding controversial issues. However, global warming is no longer controversial.

Would any such climate denier to go to a physician, receive a serious diagnosis, and then stubbornly,  deny, or ignore the medical opinion, despite the potential threat to his own life? The doctor is only one expert opinion; a confirming second opinion, would still make it only two experts. The etiology of the serious and consequential pathology affecting our planet, and fatal to earthly life, has been diagnosed by, no less than, the entire world population of expert and concerned concerned scientists.

The intentional or ignorant denial, of danger of unspeakable proportions from carbon pollution is incomparably more immoral and serious than the criminal act of negligent homicide; it is an horrendous transgression against all life; and amounts, unimaginably, to no less than the intentional and premeditated murder of an entire living planet, together with the lives of its inhabitants.

-p.

We anticipate the imminently predictable charge, that we are “contrarians” by reason of our present universal declaration: that a properly framed question, in the context of the pursuit of knowledge, exceeds in vital importance, the significance of the successfully determined answer. This is our confident conclusion, albeit the observation and our ready concession, that it is the successful resolution of the issue itself, that moves the ball forward in the specific field of endeavor, and understandably receives the applause and accolades of the interested public.

A precise derivation and a lucid statement of the relevant issue, requires sufficient knowledge of and authoritative familiarity with the area of inquiry, inclusive of its context and its background. Its most valuable and useful function relates to the direction and definition of the proper focus of the inquiry to the specifically intended area of investigation. During the process of research or experimentation, continued reference to the expressly stated issue or problem might be made, as necessary, to avoid distraction, wasted effort, and to assure the continued maintenance of disciplined and properly directed focus; the investigator must “keep his eyes on the prize.” Should a review of similar or analogous studies be useful, diligent care should be exercised in distinguishing the presenting problem from the reviewed ones. We again emphasize, that while the actual determination of the issue itself is celebrated as the apex of analytical insight, the same is necessarily and eternally, dependent upon the effective guidance and orientation provided by a lucid and precisely worded statement of inquiry.

It should, importantly, be observed, that the preceding comments are solely applicable to objective problems, such as are entailed in matters of intellectual or scientific inquiry. In the case of (subjective) human interactive problems, by stark comparison, the vital discernment or accurate selection of the operative issue is extremely difficult, often, virtually impossible.

In subjective problems, unlike empirical ones, the complication of individually nuanced perceptions rears its neurotic head and thereafter, attempts at rational diagnosis of the underlying problem very soon becomes “a bridge too far.” Additionally, the actual “facts” in issue are customarily tainted by divergent, self-serving, recollections of past experiences, as well as by the usual counterproductive, considerations of self-image and assertions of ego, by jealousy or loyalty issues and, too often, by irrelevant and misleading events.

In fact, were it (miraculously) possible for the disputants, in the context of the preceding paragraph, to identify and isolate the operative and relevant issue in dispute, (analogous to the precise articulation of the pertinent question, in objective matters) the problem, might well, ipso facto, be solved.

When problems present themselves, satisfactory solutions can only be attained by a mutual recognition of the pertinent question or issue, which provides the vital and only recipe, for a satisfactory resolution.

-p.

It would exceed even the intense pathos of Greek tragedy, if the shocking elevation to the Oval Office of Donald Trump, an incapable, egotistical, ignorant, former television game show host, were merely endured, as a one-off aberration of current history, and simply thereafter, conveniently forgotten. Rational sense and a feeling of duty seem to encourage us to examine and perhaps, understand its etiology and basis, so that we can best avoid its repetition.

The reign of a sitting national chief executive, possessing an adolescent need for immediate approval and an egotistical persona, both attached to an empty vessel of incompetence and ignorance, a person lacking perspective and the ability to make consistent and mature judgments, a false demagogue (in the old tradition of the snake oil salesmen), an abuser of women and a bigot, qualifies him for the category of a Nero, or any other historical protagonist, fortunate enough to embody all of these specified traits.

It is the declared intention of this writing to attempt to identify (as understood) our reasons for the successful election of this shameful travesty, to the highest office in the land and the leader of the entire free world; but most importantly, to avoid its replication. In the ominous words of George Santana, “They who cannot remember the past, are doomed to repeat it.”

For some perspective, we can cite other sorts of  serious mistakes in history: the sale by Russia of Alaska to the United States for .40 cents per acre, the observable incompetence in the architecture and erection of the Leaning Tower of Pisa, the abandonment of the Continent of Australia  by  the Dutch, after its discovery, on their assessment that it was  barren and therefore worthless, arid territory, the initial rejections of J.K. Rowling’s book, Harry Potter ( 22 times), the fiery Hindenburg disaster, caused by filling the giant dirigible with helium, instead of nitrogen, the planetary scale Chernobyl disaster, caused by insufficient carbon rods, and many more historical account of such events. Our [election] disaster, the subject of this note, however occurred intentionally and voluntarily, by a different set of human causes, a lethal combination of unprecedentedly high vote by citizens of inadequate education, and, by contrast, the low numbers of more aware and literate citizens, apparently disaffected with the person of Trump’s opponent.

It is because Mark Twain said,” History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme,” we felt it necessary to respectfully offer the following preventative, and if necessary, ameliorative suggestions:

• Draw upon your patience and resilience; stay politically informed,
• If necessary, vote for the good, if not the perfect, candidate for President, or lower office,
• As possible, try to be active in (local) politics,
• Stand up, fully, for your (and your neighbor’s) rights as American citizens,
• Make your political opinions heard; engage, when possible, in peaceful debate.
• Continue to respect legitimate journalism, ex. N.Y. Times, Wash. Post,
• Remain eternally hopeful and confidently optimistic.

-p.

There’s no particular place to go
You may go here, you can go there
There’s no particular way to do
You may do thus, you may do so
There’s no particular way to look
He looks like this, or looks like that
There’s no particular way to be
He is like this, you are like that
There’s no particular way to feel
She feels like this, you feel like that
There’s no particular way to see
You see it thus, she sees it so

There is one particular thing we know
And know it well right from the start
That when you truly love someone,
You love, indeed, with your whole heart

-p.

In the immediately preceding blogpost, we described an ominous pathology currently attacking and weakening the body politic of our Republican Democracy. The presentment of such malady is the unhealthy willingness of individuals, lacking sufficient self-confidence and stable self-image, to submit their individual will and belief system, to an insular interest group, in exchange for a perceived sense of belonging and needed acceptance. The derived self-esteem and needed identity, so acquired, involves sacrifice of all personal views, and the acceptance of the group’s dogma.

We have previously observed that these insular groups, composed of members sharing identical opinions and memes, maintain hostile relationships with other similarly described groups with members who are believers in common in the disparate opinion. This unhealthy phenomenon is at odds with the future envisioned by our optimistic founders, who foresaw amicable debates of issues in contention, the results of which, to be useful in the attainment of  a government, “by and for the people.”

The existence of these insular cliques is contrary to democracy, in which elections are to be indicative of the will of the individual voters. We have also observed, that the avowed and dedicated purposes of these interest groups, are consistently betrayed by their own deeds and actions; suggesting that their officially declared statements of purpose are solely for public relations reasons. [See: #264]. We feel constrained to reiterate, one such example, that of the persistence of the Right Wing  Christians and the Evangelicals in their loyal (and financial) support of President Trump, despite his expressed,  unabashed pride in his vaunted sexual peccadillos and his acts of sexual abuse.

We have previously ascribed the etiology of this syndrome, to feelings of poor individual  self- image, feelings of loneliness and insecurity, lack of adequate understanding and mature perception, and others; but none greater than the desired new perception of improved, identity and the neurotically needed, assurance of acceptance and belonging.

Prior to sharing Dr. Thomas Jefferson’s prescription for the cure of this pathology, we would like to take a moment to offer a few suggestions regarding Presidential elections, with the earnest hope that the travesty of the past election will not be repeated.

1. We need to have a required prior vetting of all candidates for President, prior to the primaries; an interview by educated and respected Americans (perhaps past Presidential office holders).
2. The vetting should include the mandated production of relevant documents, including the latest tax returns.
3. The Electoral College should be abolished as a sign of respect for the American voter.

Our consult with Dr. Thos. Jefferson, began with his usual instruction, “For a democracy to be successful, it is required to have literate and informed citizens.” We then asked him about a cure for the discussed pathology, he advised as follows: We can, indeed, have the peaceful and useful exchange of ideas as envisioned, and satisfy the early assumptions. The cure is what you, during your era, would call a “win-win.”  My findings are that many American citizens have neglected to establish for themselves, early on, an acceptable and stable self-image, a confidence in their ability to make confident judgments based upon mature and rational perspective. Evolution gave all men an advanced brain to use for independent problem solving and for growth and self -enhancement; and not for dependence on others for decision making. Individuals who are well informed, who have a familiarity with man’s history and great literature, learn that they are not isolated or detached from the whole of humanity [he stopped here, to straighten his wig] and that his life presents problems which are universal to all of mankind. Get him to read and acquire some further understanding and he will become more self-reliant by degrees, and develop a better self- image. His new found respect for himself and his own private perceptions will enable him, to make his own decisions and reach his own, confident judgments. The double benefit will be a more valuable citizen for the nation, and a more fulfilling life for himself.

After leaving us with a few blank applications for entrance to the University of Virginia [for the grandchildren] President Thomas Jefferson disappeared, leaving only some faint traces of white powder from his wig, on the polished mantle.

-p.

Homo sapiens can properly attribute its advancement over the ages to its natural predilection for inquiry. Whether conducted by the (trial and error) method [still valuable] or the more modern, sophisticated process of academic research and experimentation, man’s quest for rational   comprehension of himself and his environment, has shown success and yielded societal treasure.

Inarguably, the most valuable and precious gift to man by the evolutionary process, was an advanced brain, and secondarily, an opposable thumb. His capacity for thought enabled him to experience an awareness and understanding of himself and others, and as well, to utilize his evolved hand in techniques for survival, and in effecting alterations to his environment as necessary.

When man began living in society, interdependence and mutual defense left him time to develop an awareness of himself in relation to other individuals and to his environment, by providing further opportunity for the exercise of his innate capability to reason.  Societies developed into larger groups, later city states and still later, into nations. Life was increasingly becoming more specialized and more interdependent, which resulted in still more leisure time and opportunity to explore man’s desired understanding of life and the world around him.

Such desire for advancement historically, and predictably, came into conflict with the population of each age who, customarily, would find it preferable to cling like lichen to their traditional, superstitious and atavistic folkways [the latter human inclination, often encouraged by the Church].  It took centuries, heretical prosecutions, imprisonment and even public executions, before the permissible acceptance of the heliocentric theory, viz. that the earth travels around the sun, rather than the other way around. Remarkably, there are those today, who persistently continue to deny evolution, despite archeological, biological, serologic, geological, and empirical proofs; they would instead prefer to charge believers in evolution with religious blasphemy [shades of the Scopes case]. Obviously, the benefits and enrichment of man’s life on earth, derived from legitimate breakthroughs in knowledge, are dependent upon their general acceptance by society. A well-known, abhorrent, remark says it all, “My mind’s made up; don’t confuse me with the facts.”

In an early post, we remorsefully remarked on the failure of the optimistic expectations of our founders, that citizens of good will would amicably and constructively debate their disparate views and that the  outcome of such useful debates would inform the operations of government; thus attaining the  idealized and intended, “government, for and by the people”. In another past writing, “The Death of Civic Amity,” we observed that, instead, an unforeseen and devastating result ensued.  Rather than dedicated and informed citizens, dutifully and constructively, debating disparate views, the experience was the formation of insular, opposing cliques, composed of people, each professing mutually identical opinions; in hostile relationships with other like groups, sharing the divergent views. This unproductive and divisive phenomenon has been lately exacerbated by the appearance of the hotly contested issues of abortion, gun control, immigration policy and amazingly, climate change.

The etiology of such insular interest groups, as we are able to comprehend, is as follows: There are, within our diversely educated nation, substantial numbers of disaffected citizens, seemingly, lacking perspective and insight as to the root causes of their discontent and who feel ignored by those in authority, feeling powerless and frustrated. Many have received less than adequate education and lack the sophistication and confidence to make their grievances (real, and perceived) heard. This population furnishes the bulk of the raw material for such divisive groups. Acceptance of the individual by the group, and his adoption of its views, results in the cessation of isolated, sullen existence, and instead, offers the social brotherhood of shared opinion. It fills a vital gap, for those with a neurotic and unfulfilled need for acceptance and confirmed identity. Such priceless acquisition may well be purchased at the cost of one’s own (abandoned) views, but the social and psychological benefits, for such people are deemed, by them, to be worth it. Consistent and predictable “group think” now conveniently, and comfortably, supplants any need for assertive confidence and averts the dreaded specter of error or confusion. The member enjoys the relief from personal responsibility and potential vulnerability; his views are reliably in sync with, and safely submerged in, the mutually shared accord of the group.

Our appreciation of this dynamic, explains a great deal of much otherwise mind-boggling phenomena. We had been confused  as to the glaring inconsistencies between the steadfast and “written in stone” principles of certain dedicated, even militant, interest groups, which appear to be belied by the empirical facts which are contrary to, and inconsistent with, their fixed and inflexible  raison d’etre. We had been in a quandary as to why, for example, the[ falsely named], “Right to Life” adherents would go to the extent of committing homicide to “protect the fetus,” but uniformly oppose, vitally needed life- sustaining assistance to the needy child following the birth, or why such self-professed defenders of life, logically, can be opponents of all  efforts toward reasonable gun control, and support capital punishment,  how, on the other hand,  the fervent  supporters of the unlimited right to own or deal in guns including automatic military weapons,[ especially in light of the recent instances of mass shootings of innocent people, including young children] can be overt supporters  of “Right to Life”, how traditionally minded family people, can countenance an immigration policy which includes the Nazi-style separation of babies and young children from their mothers, how the religious wing  of the Republican party (especially the fundamentalists and Evangelicals) can still stand behind a President, a proven serial liar and egotist who  boasts about his own illicit sexual  behavior, and  personal acts of sexual abuse, how the poor and needy can continue to be Trump supporters, despite his unfulfilled demagogic promises of assistance, and how the Republican faithful, (the” base”) can continue to support  a President who expressly and falsely, represented that he would undertake to “drain the swamp,” but  in fact, enlarged  it to the proportions of a foul- smelling, Louisiana  bayou.

We can see only one plausible explanation viz., the “Life” people are not interested in the fetus (or life) at all; the family people are not interested in the issue of guns; the immigration policy of separating children from parents is not the focus of attention for family supporters and the religious Republicans  are not hot and bothered, by the sexual peccadillos of the [current  embarrassment we are constrained by the, evidently precarious, Election Law, to recognize as] President of the United States.

The neurotic desire to be accepted by, and to please, co-members of the respective interest group, seems completely to override any need for the exercise of individual thought. The practice of thinking independently for oneself, would entail the unacceptable risk of incurring the displeasure of other members of the group, upon whom, so much [in terms of previously sought acceptance, and newly acquired self- identity] depends. This” existential” concern of such insecure individuals, thus seems, as well, to emphatically override, as convenient and necessary, the recognition of factual truth. These useless citizens are veritable potholes in America’s dedicated, Century’s old, road trip to an historically sought destination: the attainment of an exemplary democracy.

-p.