plinyblogdotcom

We have observed that the reasonable (not immoderate) exercise of the many societally recognized virtues, such as empathy, honesty, truth, accuracy, loyalty, equality, and sensitivity, are universally and eternally laudable and beneficial to society. By contrast, we have learned, by empirical experience that certain generally accepted virtues in the extreme, or practiced in discrete contexts can have negative, and even hazardous effects.

For example, the commendable practice of loyalty, to one’s family, friends, and country provides a needed and comforting sense of belonging and identity; the latter virtue an existential ingredient in Man’s empirical development of self-image and personal place.  Yet, even though a reasonable degree of patriotic and familial loyalty is fully compatible with the (unrelated) virtue of compassion for others, many (MAGA) citizens see immigration as a wrongful “pollution” of the American population. These selfish individuals who have transmogrified their purported (virtue of) loyalty to the Nation to the degree of xenophobic bias, have overtly opposed the Nation’s traditionally empathic admission of needy immigrant families, and so have perverted the otherwise, admirable virtue of loyalty.

Contemporary, industrialized society understandably values the pragmatic virtue of efficiency, indisputably, significant in the commercial context of the profitable, mass production of goods and services. Nevertheless, the misapplication of such virtue has resulted in a grave and observable detriment, to the dynamic functioning of integrated society, on a universal, and permanent basis.  

We take no pleasure in the empirical confirmation of our consistently expressed fear of the application of the otherwise, commendable, and pragmatic virtue of efficiency, being blindly and irresponsibly applied in the context of the humanistic features of society predictably, resulting in irretrievable, harm. As stated in a number of our past essays, the ill-considered application of the “virtue” of convenience and efficiency, in the singular societal context of human behavior, most notably, inter-personal interaction, was inarguably, destined to be antithetical to its requisite dynamics and healthy existence.

Human beings have chosen to live in society due to their innate need for personal contact and interaction with other humans. Such personal interaction is the foundational, experiential basis for the existence of independent, self-awareness and personal identity, the latter, developed by the empirical interactive responses of other humans. In addition, the elements mandatorily comprising personal security and vital societal cohesion are positively confirmed and buttressed by personalized communicative contact. In past writings, we have expressed our deep concern that the substitution of the comforting, mutual recognition of identity, by the parties to a conversation (in person or by telephone) and its inherent facility of spontaneity of relevant response, by the impersonal and “highly efficient” smartphone, would be individually and societally disastrous.

As feared, the World has rapidly become defined and utterly subsumed by the digital world. Mental health, especially of the young, has been negatively affected in a world, dominated by singular handheld screens; such robotic tragedy, further exacerbated by the prophylactic necessity to eschew personal contact during the pandemic. It is our disturbing observation that children seem to have become a different species, adept at navigating the digital world, but often, as reported, depressed and inept at impulse control. In our view, the ubiquitous and thoughtless homage to the “virtue” of facile efficiency has permanently altered society for the worse.

The ages’ societally lauded, virtue of personal ambition, or aspiration for “success,” may be considered a true virtue, perhaps, even a pragmatic necessity, in our enterprising Capitalistic economy. However, the context of such useful virtue, observed in the persona of many individuals, has often demonstrated perverted extremes and neurotic aspirational misconception. Such perversion has driven such nuanced individuals to an insatiable lust for the proverbial, “gold medal” in their misguided aspiration to be the “winner” in a subjectively proclaimed competition, for the amassment of (excessive and, pragmatically speaking, useless) wealth. No one can, as a practical matter, live better, or happier on two billion than on one billion, or, for that matter on ten million, dollars. Neurotic enslavement to a personal financial scoreboard for such insatiably, misguided individuals is their skewed personal perception of the measure of “virtue” operative in their nuanced definitional success.

In our writings, we have, principally and consistently, defined healthy and rationally determined “success,” rather, as the  realistic and joyful personal perception, later in life, of self-fulfillment; the latter an intrinsic, and eternal, contextually applicable, “virtue.”

-p.

While painfully ruminating on certain current negative phenomena (viz. book banning, censorship, and xenophobia) our thoughts,  somehow, wandered back to the time of our senior year in High School and  a memorable character, “Geenzie” or, properly, “Jeremy Klotz.” Geenzie was physically unable to join our coterie of friends who regularly played basketball after school in the schoolyard and rarely accompanied us to dances and parties for the same reason as his non-participation in sports. Geenzie was fat, big-bellied, with short arms and legs, and haplessly, clumsy and poorly coordinated.

Thus, there was scant reason to befriend and socialize with him, with the sole and compelling exception that his family owned one of the rare, newly developed, color televisions with a wider-than-usual screen, acquired by the good fortune of his father, Albert’s, employment as Assistant Manager at the corner appliance store. On most Saturday afternoons, in the appropriate season, we would assemble, at Geenzie’s living room, to enjoy colorfully watching College football games. However, such opportunity to watch College football games in color and on a bigger screen had its countervailing considerations; his apartment was eternally, uncomfortably hot, which latter feature enhanced the less-than-aesthetic impact of the malodorous, deeply-couch-ensconced presence of Geenzie. But, properly, to our theme.

While, we regularly indulged in neighborhood sports and greatly appreciated and much-lauded the demonstrated high skill of the uniquely talented televised players, Geenzie, by contrast, who was as athletic and supple as a burlap sack of stale Vidalia Onions, would loudly and emphatically, deprecate every instance of an incomplete pass or failed tackle. The ironic recollection that he needed to struggle, simply to free himself from the soft surface of his couch yet unashamedly, had arrogated to himself the franchise to jeer and comment at every failed play (albeit by such especially talented football players), informs our present, analogous understanding of the nature of the ironically, low caliber of the book banners, censors and xenophobes, the protagonists of our, disturbing ruminations, as stated above.

Those many of us who have valuably and enjoyably included the reading of good literature in the woven fabric of our lives, empirically, could and would not, possess any desire to limit or restrict others’ literary choices The reader’s naturally developed enlightenment and acquired respect for nuanced interests, would, systemically, disincline him from such un-American, arrogant, and despotic activity. In our view, it has, eternally, been the semi-literate, reductionist, based upon some purported, moral or religious grounds, who would choose to trespass on such basic freedom. Such dedicated censors would appear to be more than adequately possessed of the qualities of ignorance and incapacity, and like Geenzie, hopelessly deficient in relevant skill or rectitude.

Identical principles apply to all ubiquitous species of hapless and un-American censorship of the written word, inclusive of the recent advent of the attempted arbitrary constraints relative to the tactical expurgation of academic education. Moreover, these tailors of expression and would-be diluters of empirical history have empirically, demonstrated the personal absence of a modicum of intellectual and moral basis, for their purported “self-righteous” and reductionist behavior. History, like creative writing, is not store-bought hanger merchandise, in need of alteration; and most emphatically, not by such consummately, reductive, and unskilled, tailors.

In addition to their colossal ignorant bias, we assign a “Geenzie” measure of ineptitude and lack of perspective to America’s selfish and provincial xenophobes, who remain in dedicated (MAGA) opposition to the immigration of foreign families, desperately seeking an acceptable way of life. Their myopic ignorance extends to their appalling lack of recognition that our Nation is (virtually, 100%) populated by immigrants and their progeny, (inclusive of the most radically biased and selfish xenophobe). We, as first-generation American citizens, have eternally sided with Lady Liberty, who forever raises her beacon as an invitation to needy immigrants; and as well, with her personal poet laureate, Emma Lazarus, that our fortunate nation, for moral and humanistic reasons, continues to admit foreign nationals, escaping from dangerous or impoverished countries; and seeking a better life, as did we and our forebears.

Notably, American citizens who have had the benefit of the broadening experiences of traveling abroad, and the enlightening satisfaction of social interaction with citizens of other countries and ethnicities, would predictably, refrain from espousing the xenophobic, ignorant prejudice, inherent in stagnant, provincial entities, as personified by our recollected, archetypal- schlemiel, Geenzie.

-p.

It appears to be a universal nuance of the human persona, that repeated cautions and warnings, regardless of the seriousness of the articulated jeopardy, suffer some measure of loss in impact and exigent significance, by their numerous reiteration. Looking back at the virtual plethora of rational admonitions (appropriately and urgently) articulated over the past twelve months, concerning the existential threat, posed by Trump and his unwashed MAGA horde of populists to our democracy, it may be useful (with apologies to Sr. Guglielmo Marconi) to express a description of the imminent threat to the Nation, in the analogous terms of a dynamic electrical grid.

The electrical grid, itself, is a network of synchronized power and its connected consumers. We understand that Grids are synchronized, meaning that all distributive areas operate with a three-phase alternating current so that predictable voltage swings occur virtually, simultaneously.

The empirical likelihood of the election of the darling of the MAGA populists, Donald J. Trump, whose immorality and autocratic intentions proclaim him, historically, as the first American President to be criminally indicted, poses an existential threat to the structural apparatus and the generational power source of our historically unique and reliably functioning, American Democracy. Trump, in, no doubt, in his maiden reputational moment of veracity, has publically and unashamedly declared that, if re-elected, he will be a “dictator,” (i.e., “for one day”). In our selected analogical context, he predictably would autonomously and dictatorially“short-circuit” our democratic and, well-functioning, tri-partite grid and rule.

As analogously expressed, to the scientifically devised structure and operation of the existentially democratically (three-phase) grid, any such consequential power failure or, extinguishment, of our Founders’ constitutionally mandated, architecturally structured design of the Nation’s singular “balance of powers,” would, in very short order, result in a disastrous and irreparable termination of the salutary flow of the foundational dynamics of the Nation’s soundly and equitably established polity and conceivably the ultimate ” blackout” of our celebrated American way of life. Should such a national catastrophe be permitted to occur, as demonstrated by history, such tragic conditions are not, empirically, alleviated by any facile procedure analogously comparable to routinely changing a blown fuse.

As an enlightened American citizen and, notably, in the citizen’s self-interest, it is mandatorily advisable to soberly and responsibly, recognize the coming Presidential election, in realistic, empirical, and impactful effect, as a pitted and ultimate contest between the salutary, free, and enlightened existence ofour constitutionally granted, franchise of personal liberty and the autocratic, historically, predictable, darkened and repressed state of autocracy.

-p.

There appear to be occasions where a word or concept, despite past frequent use, has not been recently thought about, and, for some reason, later becomes prominent in one’s thought. We had such an interesting experience, recently with the ubiquitously used term, “fossil fuel.”

As commonly known, fossil fuel is a high-carbon-containing, natural substance such as coal and oil, found in the crust of the Earth, derived from the remains of animals and plants of our geologic past, millions of years after the organic remains become mixed with sedimentary matter and burial.

In a recent writing, (#M.2, “STREAMS Of CONSCIOUSNESS”) we observed that, from time to time, one indulges the relaxed and pleasant franchise of letting his mind flow spontaneously, and freely, which often leads to inner thoughts and occasionally, fantasy. As indicated above, we had such an experience, which in addition to its phantasmagoric content and essence, was felt to be laughingly, facetious.

Our uninhibited thoughts turned to man’s fortunate inheritance of unlimited graveyards of pre-historic animals, most particularly, dinosaurs, who lived out their prehistoric years, eating profusely, and procreating, then heroically and with great generosity, choosing to expire at accessible venues, within the Earth’s sedimentary conglomerate; thus affording to testamentary beneficiaries such as Sinclair, Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Gulf, and a myriad of other like establishments throughout our Nation to subsist and thrive.  We notably, are rather taken aback and xenophobically disappointed that so much largesse had been undeservedly, bequeathed to the various Middle Eastern nations. However, with the recent advent of electrically driven automobiles, such undeserved political influence may, accordingly, wane.

With the reader’s indulgence, we would now return to our episode of fossil fuel-dinosaur fantasy.

We found ourselves engaged in the arcane attempt to identify the specific primordial creatures, to be memorably credited, with producing the salient ingredients constituting the fluid mix of our usual automobile fill-ups; the latter endeavor, to be performed on a strictly, equitable and non-partial basis, in an appreciative attempt to assign posthumous gratitude to the specifically identified primordial philanthropist for said acts of largesse.

The concededly complex task was to construe a utilitarian method for the designation of these primordial remains as assigned to their appropriate purveyor. At first, we assumed some sort of Kabbalah-like clue observation regarding the first letter of the name of the discreet company. Thus, Citgo and Chevron, Carnotaurus; Shell, Sinclair and Sunoco, Stegosaurus; Mobil: Mastodon; BP: Brontosaurus combined with Mastodon, and sundry pre-historic fauna.

 Such analysis was ultimately and objectively rejected, for the reason that the convenience of the method of designation was deemed unscientific and arbitrary.

We unsuccessfully attempted to employ other and sundry, alternate criteria in our determined searches, such as size, number (of outlets), octane (the higher the count, the more predatory the beast), and proximity (the closer to green environments, the greater the conclusion that the specific dinosaur was vegetarian; however all proved to be of no avail.

After much diligent research, travail, and profound contemplation, we were resigned to be relegated to a personally unsatisfactory conclusion, amounting to the unspecific, “stew/ soup theory,” which, more pragmatically instructs the didactic researcher that gas-guzzling automobiles ingest the haphazard and mixed remains of a vast and multi- diverse potpourri of primordial monsters, all in equal measure, metamorphosed and noxiously polluting.

-p.

The trauma and eminent danger to our unique Republican Democracy, brought about by the elevation of the disreputable Donald J. Trump, may have demonstrated that the antiquated American adage, “One rotten apple spoils the barrel,” was not merely, aphoristic, but constituted an empirical truth. The prospect that such an impaired entity returns to the office of the Chief Executive is chilling to the “core.” [Apologies]

In our view, yet more perilous to our democratic polity is the remarkably numerous, populist support for said egotistical, immoral, and autocratic charlatan. He was shockingly and appallingly, elevated to the Oval Office once, and despite two Congressional impeachments, 91 felonies, and multiple indictments for major crimes, the latter, spanning the spectrum from pay-offs to prostitutes with whom he conducted brisk business, tax, and voter fraud, to fomenting a violent insurrection against the United States of America, and demonstrated, acts of actual treason. Notwithstanding his egregious record, this racist, egocentric, autocratic felon, according to the current political polls seems to be well assured of candidacy in the next Presidential election.

We, presumably, together with other mainstream Americans are understandably, apprehensive concerning the empirical possibility that Trump may once more be elected; a result that political science experts have declared would predictably imperil the continuance of our Democratic Republic. Donald Trump has shown himself to be a great admirer of Putin, Xi Jinping, Kim Jung Un, and Viktor Oban, and has publically declared that he will be a (“Dictator for one day”).

Because we are in the apprehension of such a nightmare, we have availed ourselves of the opportunity to reprise a previously articulated theme, which, nevertheless, in harmony with democracy, provides a pragmatic solution to the nation’s conundrum, as reported by the political pollsters, that our fragile democracy is in peril, due to the wide profusion of populist, ill-informed, Trump cultists.

Our previously articulated and now championed panacea for the resolution of the dilemma has its fundamental and contextual basis in the sage, prescient, and circumspect admonition of Thomas Jefferson: “For a democracy to succeed, it is required to have an educated and well-informed citizenry.”

It is an unhappy and empirically perilous fact, that we have a large population of inadequately educated and poorly informed citizens, each of whom, in consonance with the dynamics of our Democratic Republic, possesses the inalienable right to vote. Accordingly, it would appear, in our view that the sole, pragmatic solution, is to vet (“police”) the prospective candidates, to filter out the danger of future “bad apples.” If the prospective candidates (albeit of diverse opinions on the prevailing issues) were previously accorded acceptability, under some form of bi-partisan or academic evaluation, the “apple barrel” would not suffer the danger of spoliation; contrary to today’s hazardous situation.

It is truly bizarre to observe, in this context, that with the sole exception of the selection of candidates to run for the august and historically impactful office of the American Presidency (“finger on the nuclear trigger, etc.) it is routinely mandatory regarding an application for the most mundane employment to require an employer interview, or, a reasonable vetting to determine acceptability. An application for a job in a shoe store, Macy’s, or a retail job at Walmart is normally dependent upon the applicant’s approval by a representative of the prospective employer. An aspiring shoe salesman, insurance broker, or an employee at a beauty parlor is required, initially, to be vetted; but bizarrely and in a grossly irresponsible fashion, not the candidates for the highest, most powerful and historically, impactful position on the Globe.

The nation would be eternally enabled to reliably retain its admirable and well-functioning democracy, despite its disappointingly large sub-section of somewhat lesser  “Jeffersonian” (population-determined), standard of success, by the assurance that all, legally approved, Presidential aspirants are, at a minimum, reasonably acceptable.  

We would confidently assume that the non–partisan (mixed partisan?) examiners in their vetting of aspiring Presidential candidates, will be motivated by the exercise of pragmatic wisdom as is appropriate to knowledgeable, competent, and politically neutral experts.

-p. 
 

In a similar, but distinct context to the immediate predecessor of this writing, (viz., #M.3 “EXIGENT SURGURY”) the present essay concerns itself with a single word, viz., “tolerance” but, in bright contrast, our aspiration, at present, is for the limited and nuanced use of a certain, ubiquitously, used word, rather than its elimination from our vocabulary, as previously urged regarding, “race.”

In our view, the appropriate utility of the word “tolerance,” is limited to its pragmatic and contextual use in the declaration of empirical limits or properties of objective subject matter; such as relevant to a particular metal’s tolerance for torque, the comparative tolerance, during dry spells, of ryegrass as opposed to red fescue, the basic limit of tolerance for the average human being to extreme, freezing temperatures.

By emphatic contrast, we, on moral principle emphatically object to the common use of the word, contextually in the area of race relations or other instances of bigotry, as a complimentary observation of individual behavior.   

The fundamental essence and dynamics of “tolerance,” reside in its function as a positive comment in response to observed action or words that indicate the actor or speaker’s evident choice not to object to diverse points of view, or, perhaps, more frequently in response to observed virtue in the treatment accorded to others whose appearances are nuanced or who behave differently. The word is ordinarily intended to be complimentary, as an expression of moral approval or recognized rectitude, however, in our view, its fundamental dynamics (often, unwittingly) are presumptuous and arrogantly, judgmental.

It may logically and equitably be asked, who is it that uniquely has the franchise to determine the extant acceptability of other individuals or points of view? The themed word implicitly and necessarily connotes (wittingly or not) an individual’s chosen judgment or derived conclusion, to forebear from criticism, and exercise his choice to accept another individual. Who has been granted the authoritative franchise, morally and justifiably, to arrogate to himself such judgmental authority? In our view “tolerate” and the noun, “toleration,” is nothing short of an expression of an unwarranted, presumptuous generosity to morally or reasonably suffer, or imperiously, approve, the existence of another human being or point of view. The intention of the word is intrinsically, self-defeating in its dynamics as to its mundane and insensitive intention, evidently due to its thoughtlessly, but implicitly mandatory, judgmental connotation.

The conception and use of the word “tolerance,” is inarguably, lightyears in preference to words of disapproval or those expressing feelings of atavistic prejudice, nevertheless, when employed as an attempt to express virtue, it pales in comparison with those words which express humanities aspirational traits (which, disappointingly, appear to be somewhat, lacking) such as “brotherhood,” “friendship,” “universal equality,” “respect,” “empathy,” to suggest stated qualities, of far more humanistic value and clarity than our themed, misunderstood and ill-used word “tolerance.”

-p.

We have always been ardent believers in free speech and have taken a lifelong position in opposition to censorship of any kind. Nevertheless, we would strongly champion the surgical excision of one word, viz. “Race,” from the American lexicon. (Ref: our early blog, “The Dirtiest Word”). Said malignant word or concept has no scientific justification; it is, rather, a pernicious social construct assigned by the arbitrary rules of society and constitutes the fundamental basis for an eternal blemish on the history of humankind. As stated in the earlier cited blog, the word’s sole utility is the production of societal mischief. It is our earnest recommendation that a selected and skilled surgeon, possessing a measure of literary consciousness, take the lexicon scalpel to it in exacting fashion, hopefully, to retard its universally eternal and virulent metastasis.

The toxic history of the calamitous word has been as timeless as it has been unjust and tragic. It has utility only for those disreputable human beings who seek to dominate or to profit from others, to assuage neurotic feelings of inadequacy, or to cater to an insatiable need for perceived power. The victims of the word and concept, have eternally suffered deprivation of their liberty and opportunity for a normal and acceptable life. The pernicious noun has historically been the tool of human injustice and misery of every kind from diminished opportunities and social degradation to slavery and actual genocide; it is as societally ubiquitous as it is inhuman, in that it is religiously sanctioned by the “Good Book.” “The Word,” it appears, might need a bit of surgery, as well.

The historically, deplorable existence of our Nation’s black slavery is universally known, and, sadly, its iniquitous impact persists today in the atavistic and immoral bigotry of many populist citizens; notably and shamefully, in our past President. Anti-Semitism is a chronic racial pathology festering at least since the Holy Roman Empire, (4^th Century) then part of Emperor Constantine’s tactical program to forcibly convert the recalcitrant Hebrews to Christianity. European pogroms, assassinations at Babyn Yar, the Holocaust, such haters as Father Mc Laughlin, Henry Ford, and the contemporary Christian White Militias, bear ugly witness to the eternal existence of racial anti-Semitism.

In the years before World War 2, Jews were socially acceptable in Mussolini’s Italy, with many rising to the highest rank in that nation’s military and elevated social status. However, when Hitler came to power, Italian Jews began to suffer the identically gruesome fate of their German and European counterparts; the pathology of racial antisemitism had arrived and efficiently become epidemic.

It is instructive to observe that the defamatory anti-immigration demagoguery of the past President, Donald Trump, is empirically, more racist than xenophobic. Trump’s “First Lady,” past wives, and grandfather were all immigrants. The target of Trump’s hatred is, observably racial, being directed towards immigrants from Mexico and Central America as opposed to those from Europe.

The abominable word “race,” and its atavistic practice have eternally become the fundamental rationale for hatred and bigotry. Its exigent and immediate surgical excision from the American-English dictionary would scarcely be noticeable to the upright and rational American citizen.

-p.

It was not until the time of our late youth, that we encountered the revolutionary writing style of James Joyce, in his dense, but important novel, “Ulysses,” and received confirmation that the psychological phenomenon of “Stream of Consciousness,” is appropriately included among the many standard, approved behaviors; and can, moreover, be successfully, (in fact, brilliantly) employed in literature.

The subject designation refers to the dynamics of a mode of thought or, in the case of Joyce, a literary style, in which, thoughts, feelings, and reactions are depicted in free and continuous flow. For us, such a Joyce-legitimated dynamic constituted a necessary personal affirmation of the integrity of our self-esteem and our perceived orderly reason. It would appear that throughout our entire contemplative lifetime, most especially, in our later and more reflective years, our thoughts, on occasion, have freely and spontaneously triggered others, albeit, at times, unrelated, except for their experiential, aesthetic, or syllabic (suggestive) causation. Such dynamic, as experienced, is spontaneous and seldom, volitional.

As dedicated writers of essays and poetry, the suggestively triggered phenomenon, on occasion, has led us to romanticized, philosophical, or aesthetic thoughts and images, at times, bordering on the profound or metaphysical, but more often on thoughts of experiential or picturesque subject matter.

A recent and personally notable experience of this contextual phenomenon took place, apparently, in response to our casual sight of an attractive picture of a white-frosted, multi-layered cake in a Kingston, New York, local magazine. Thereafter, looking through our enormous picture windows, we mentally, construed an attractive layer of pristine, white, snow on the surface of the outdoor property and a fanciful image appeared, no doubt triggered by the prior observation of the picture of the described cake. The thought, or consciousness, was of the existence of a multi-layered ground, outside, with a white (frosted?) coating of new fallen, pristine winter snow.

It was, no doubt, our aesthetic inclination that led us to reflexively summon up in our consciousness, an earthly vision of a (cake-like), parallel-layered structure of the earth beneath the snowy (icing) surface each layer of ground separately distinguished by separate, distinct compartmental phenomena. Starting just below the (“icing”) snow, we would see, if it were possible, topsoil with the remains of last season’s grass, now lifeless, brown, and inert. Descending to another layer of the soil (“cake”) we would see an amalgamation (cake filling) of pebbles, bits of dead tree branches and plants, dormant roots, seeds, nascent shoots, and possibly bulbs, patiently resting and awaiting spring and their perennial surface re-generation and verdance.

Going deeper into the darker (chocolate?) and more remote soil, alongside some large rocks we would see open spaces borrowed holes (free-think: Borough Halls?) engineered by little brown, furry critters, curled up, wrapped for needed warmth in their furry tails, a few pregnant, all asleep and still, except for the soft inhalations the occasional nose wrinkle, patiently awaiting the onset of the primavera, warmer weather and the availability of food.

Above the surface of the snowy ground (iced layer cake) stand the stalwart trees, with fiduciary responsibility, in their ( birthday candle-erect) fiduciary guard as the preservative of the earthly cake, as protection against the erosion of its dormant soil (layers) as well as the damaging vicissitudes of unwanted meteorology; they will, deservedly, share the coming verdant season with the wakeful, quickly emerging, woodland critters in their jointly anticipated enactment of the imagined scenario of our momentary stream of consciousness. 

–p.

The reader is not obliged to possess the academic experience of a political scientist or social philosopher, to fully comprehend that the violent insurrection of two years ago (January 20, 2020) in Washington D.C., was, not a “one-off” or singular occurrence; or that such event describes the complete parameters of the relevant and existential problem.  Analogous to the tell-tale, rash of smallpox, the unprecedented event constitutes, speaking pathologically, merely, a presenting symptom of the threat of the virulent disease.  In the context of community, it is empirically true that a specific episode of the deadly smallpox virus may be treated successfully, nevertheless, the ever-present societal threat of the virus persists. As a matter of general interest, albeit not, of special relevance to the theme of this essay, we have read that a major factor in the victory of the Colonial Forces over the military might of England was the prudent program of inoculation of his troops against smallpox by General George Washington.

Notably, there seems to have been an unmistakable empirical confluence between the political rise of the real estate grafter, cheap television game show host, the egocentric, amoral demagogue, Donald J. Trump, and the geologic conglomeration of vast numbers of the Nation’s previously, amorphous and silent populist discontents. As we can discern, the enormous host of such previously unheard-from, typically, inadequately educated, poorly informed body of malcontents seemed to perceive, in the crude, and inappropriate persona of Trump, a personal spokesman for those, who had been handed a bad deal from society; especially, “the coastal elites;” who appeared to detest their proxy, Donald J. Trump.

Neither two Congressional impeachments during his disreputable, one term as President, nor his shamefully determined ninety-one felonies, numerous criminal indictments, nor a judicial finding that he is a rapist, his acts of treason, his serial mendacity and his public admissions of autocratic intentions (the latter, extending to his unabashed public reiteration and approval of Hitler quotes) has diminished his cultish support. Such societally shameful events have, perversely, resulted in increased support from his large conglomerate of (MAGA) supporters, private citizens as well as elected legislators and officials. Mainstream, traditional American citizens are confused about such dynamics and understandably worried about the existential continuance of American Democracy. The cult-like populist followers of the declared, would-be dictator, like flocks of suicidal lemmings, appear hypnotically willing to commit the suicidal choice of autocratic elimination of their presently held rights and liberty.

In accordance with the consistent results of the various polls, it frighteningly seems likely that Trump will be the Republican (if there still exists such a Party) nominee to run once more for the American Presidency. Should he, conceivably (heaven and Planet Earth, forbid) be successful, the dreaded pathology of fascist dictatorship would then, further metastasize (from China, Russia, Hungary, et al.); should he (mercifully) lose, a reprise episode of the January 26 pilot is empirically, predictable.

We shall persist in our hopeful expectation that the express language and pragmatic mandate of the 14^th Amendment will be the ultimate panacea for this presenting, malign National disease that, inarguably, constitutes a clear, existential threat to the health and survival of America’s singular and invaluable democracy.

–p.

We find it challenging to acknowledge the publication of one thousand writings (blogs and poetry,) in the approximately four years since the advent of plinyblog. Candidly speaking, the activity has been meaningful and enjoyable, most inestimably, in our elder and reflective years. The franchise to spontaneously express our empirical observations on humanity and society, together with the considered conclusions derived, has been truly fulfilling and self-affirming. As previously expressed, we do not especially favor the tonal euphony of the noun, “blog,” itself, nevertheless, the simplicity of its characteristic form enables the spontaneous selection and ubiquitous variety of subject matter.

In our exercise of the franchise of self-expression, the contextual motivation of our mini-essays have, essentially, been three in number: (1)The promotion of individual advancement through independent reading and/or the pursuit of elective interests, (2)  the universal empathic and humanistic connection with fellow inhabitants of the Planet and (3) the promotion of universal equality in society and government. Much of our offered poetry embodies such thematic purposes, nevertheless, their primary aspiration is, generally aesthetic.

While efforts toward cognitive advancement and existential enlightenment of are goals of primary importance among our aspirations, we are, nevertheless, systemically unable, to remain silent in the presence of societal or governmental lack of rectitude.

Consistent with such avowed purposes, we have sought to encourage the tenets of moral humanism, regarding the liberal admission of immigrants from countries that are impoverished or those that autocratically pose threats of imprisonment. We have also championed the American ideal of universal equality, with special emphasis on the universally democratic right to vote, and have opposed the autocratic policies and the (unthinkable) possible re-election to the Oval Office of past President (Trump); the latter, for publically evident characterological reasons and because of deep concern for the existential endurance of our Democracy.

As mainstream, traditional citizens, we have been obliged to mourn and comment on the demise of the traditionally revered and referential High Court (“SCOTUS”) and the complete deterioration of one of the two systemic parties in our government; the latter, caused by an inexplicable lemming-like populist mesmerizing practiced by the demonstrated enemy of democracy, the moral agnostic, Donald J. Trump.

We have been alarmed and greatly troubled at the sudden improper insertion of religion into American Law and government in clear legal and philosophical violation of the constitution’s “Establishment Clause” by SCOTUS, most especially, in its’ (contra-precedential) destruction of women’s private and inherent right to abortion. The motivation of the Founders irrefutably evident in the language of the American Constitution was to protect and preserve citizen rights from being abridged by Federal or State government and not, conversely, to decree their abolition.

We have expressed our disheartenment in the High Court’s inaction in abiding by the gun lobby’s tactical and profitable distortion of the historical purpose and language of the grant of the right to the “People” (i.e., State militia) to bear arms, as contained in the Second Amendment. It is (historically, indisputably inserted as a sinecure to the proponents of independent State sovereignty, who had opposed a Central (Federal) government.) The tragic plethora of bloodshed and murder of innocent citizens, from babies to grandparents, constitutes a shameful (and unconstitutional) homage by SCOTUS to the profit-making, pathological gun lobby by its approval of the industry’s profitable and pathological misreading of plain history.

We confess to a systemic sense of personal and responsible impetus to articulate matters of timely concern, including, Society’s apparent sleepwalking through the presenting dual, imminent threats of impending fascism and global warming. We also enjoy the pleasure of writing on general subjects, of perceived general interest. We look forward to its responsible and self-fulfilling, continuance, and gratefully, our readership’s continued interest.

 Mille gracias.

-p.