plinyblogdotcom

It is responsibly necessary to clearly distinguish the rational, pragmatic, and voluntary context of “consensus,” from that of the self-abnegating and neurotic concept of “groupthink.” The contextual and dynamic essence of the contrasting concepts are irrefutably, antithetical.

The dynamics of consensus may be illustrated, among an unlimited plethora of examples, by the writings of Rousseau on the subject of what he termed the “The Social Compact” (“Contract”). It was his memorable observation that members of society, jointly and consensually, submit to the voluntary surrender of certain personal liberties (relevant to the public interest) by tacit agreement, in exchange for the many-faceted benefits of mutually living in society. Such a pragmatic and contractual concept of living in society necessarily is predicated upon the foundational existence of personal choice.  The willing members self-interestedly, elect by mutual consensus, to accept certain restrictions on individual liberty, deemed necessary and appropriate to living in a society with others.

The notable predicate in the definitional existence of “consensus” is the existence of an individuated, free, and determinative exercise of rational choice by its mutual constituents.

In bright contrast, the definition and dynamics of the phenomenon of “group think,” the latter, a derogation of the conception of free will, as well as an impediment to the dynamics of democracy, connotes the willing surrender of individual will and personal judgment for non-rational reasons; most often, observably, founded upon a (neurotically) perceived need for acceptance and group approval. The latter phenomenon appears to exemplify many irrational, even bizarre, extant human behaviors.

An individual’s election to surrender his personally held views and judgmental choices (as often declared in this blog space) reveals the likely presence of personal insecurity, and the resultant need for a comforting sense of acceptance is customarily founded upon an insufficient development of a stable and referential, self-image. Such failure is stereotypically, concomitant with an inadequate education or limited exposure to others of diverse views.

In the case of normally socialized, healthy, and contemplative individuals, as they mature, the accumulated experience of personal responses to the multitude of life’s varying stimuli, tends to afford, a sense of consistency of response; the latter precedential to the creation of a personal sense of identity (“self-image”) and the perceived capacity for self-determination. One’s developed self-image is his referential basis for moral decision-making (as rationally opposed to rewards and punishment, secular or divine) as well as his rational point of view.

The Founders often articulated their doctrinaire belief that the future citizens of the newly created experimental Democracy would, in a responsible and neighborly manner, debate the controversial issues of the day. The results of such debates would be of use in the governance of a Nation, “By and for the People.”  The white-wigged Founders were dedicatedly optimistic and, unfortunately, in error.

As we have written, in disappointing contrast to the Founders’ anticipated, neighborly, and dutiful conduct of debates on the controversial issues of the day, what developed was a divisive hatred between citizens of disparate opinion. Such groups have been engaged in consequent formation of insular fraternal groups or “tribes” of mutual and uniform opinion, engaged in a continuing state of hostile “Cold War” with other like groups of divergent views. This social dynamic may be seen as relevant in political, religious, and inter-active social contexts.

The motivation for membership in such a “tribal,” or insular group is, all too often, the product of the individual’s perception of personal insecurity and a neurotic yearning for the needed affirmation of group acceptance. In this context, the prevailing homogeneous tribal opinion, itself, may conceivably be of little interest to, or, realistically, at odds, with the views of the applicant to the group. The membership is sought, and upon acceptance enjoyed, to assuage such neurotic yearning for acceptance and affiliation. The individual’s willingness and perhaps, his overt demonstration of loyal support of the tribal message, or point of view,  may conceivably, amount to an actual denial of his own exercise of reason, in exchange for that needed perception of acceptance. Such willing submission to such a tribe’s prevailing stance is critically denominated as “groupthink.”

This thematic concept may be useful in the attempted comprehension of the bizarre, eternal loyalty, by Donald Trump’s huge, variegated (MAGA) conglomerate of discontents, in the face of his publically, demonstrated criminality and emotional derangement, and notably, despite his publically expressed, autocratic desire for the limitation of their personal rights.

-p.

At present, we are in the process of contemplation of the imminent publishing of a numerically, noteworthy essay, (Blogpost # 1000) and the expiration of the period of eight years since the conception of plinyblog. It has not been our practice (with few exceptions, viz., birthdays, and wedding anniversaries) to award metaphysical significance to any otherwise, notable dates or calculated level, per se, as singularly significant (despite their pragmatic necessity). We have, instead, sought to emphasize the essential and objective significance of the meaningful landmark events, themselves. Thus, at this precipitate time, we have succumbed to an admittedly, nuanced, desire to offer our all-encompassing, landmark (# 1000^th) statement.

 As declared at the inception of plinyblog, we have determinatively, elected to express our written views in the grammatical second person (i.e. “we,”), to avoid the possible perception that our writings are the “self-righteous” product of personal editorializing or as the expression of egotistic presumption.  Our observations have, consistently, been based on our empirical experience and consequent learning. Our dedication has been to offer, for the readers’ possible interest, our nuanced thoughts, and observations, as they have been perceived by us, from empirical experience.

We have attempted, as well, to avoid the perception that we were recounting various episodes of autobiographical content for the purpose of their revelation. Specifically, the intended purpose of our essays on our early childhood experiences in the contextual exotica of the 1940s, European Ashkenazi immigrants, was principally, to effectively portray the nuanced features of their transplanted lives.

The salient, theme, running through our past 977 ubiquitous essays, amounts to a reflection of our ardent devotion to the responsibility and necessity of Man’s efforts at his intellectual and cultural advancement, thereby fulfilling his life, and derivatively, for the betterment of his society.

Thus, we have eternally promoted the wise and salubrious “long-term investment” in the lifetime undertaking of personal and beneficial elective interests, viz., reading good literature, engagement in hobbies, or the personal study of science, the arts, and the humanities. The development of independent knowledge, interests, and skills, au dehors the boundaries of one’s family life and employment, is fertile ground for advanced maturity and confident individual thought. Travel, where possible, is especially salubrious. The opportunity to exercise one’s individualized and personal reason is the key to effective personal contemplation and a clear window into the empirical understanding of life and humanity. Our view regarding the classic, philosophically examined, concept of, “happiness,” is essentially encompassed in the development of the ultimate sense of self-fulfillment; the latter, a predictable product of individual learning and its consequent increase in understanding and the attainment of mature perspective (i.e. “wisdom”).

At this point in this writing, by unavoidable necessity, and with appropriate apology, we would descend into a less important, autobiographical context, albeit, solely for illustrative purposes, in demonstration of the salubrious nature of the ultimately rewarding lifestyle, outlined in the preceding paragraph.

We have recently attained the venerable age of 87, and become the uncomfortable recipients, of a painful back and troublesome knee; such that, a “walker” is required for our restricted perambulation; the latter activity, normally, restricted to the confines of our apartment or country residence. As a practical, age-related phenomenon, our physical condition has mandated the cessation of many favored, lifetime activities, travel, walks in the park, gardening, swimming, and the like. Yet, we remain content.

In a past essay, “Old Age Is Not A Disease,” we weighed the pain and uncomfortable physical limitations of old age, against the valuable, concomitant, facility of the simultaneous acquisition of the increase in understanding (“farschtant”) and mature perception. Our cumulative knowledge and lifelong development of knowledge, derived from experience, as above declared, has resulted in an objective, situational understanding of early life experiences as well as a rational reconcilement with the extant physical disabilities and discomforts of old age.

For those individuals who have entertained the thematic, lifetime development of inner personal thought, the recognition of the temporal absence of the storm and stress, common to youthful life, the cessation of life’s subsequent, multifarious anxieties, regarding personal issues, family, children, and finances, constitute an appreciated and comforting mitigation of the extant discomfort. For contemplative individuals, mature recognition of, and acquiescence to, the natural phenomena of age (assuming a reasonably acceptable state of general health) leads to a positive opportunity for a peaceful and especially pleasant, contemplative life.

Such a state of mind promotes the pleasurable and stimulating ability to selectively meditate on a library-full cornucopia of subjects, serious or recreational, to ponder, and to make virtual voyages to recollected places of past travel (without the impediments of packing, travel to the airport, flying, arrival, customs and security lines, hotel travel, unpacking and the like) and, most especially, to enjoy at will, the extensive benefits of an unfettered exercise of reason and imagination and, thereby, to pleasurably, savor the especially sweetness of the dessert that follows life’s main courses.

-p.

We have been considering the cogent possibility, that the basis of our condemnation of the former President, founded on his demonstrated misdeeds, his criminality, and immoral behavior, can be viewed from a somewhat nuanced, albeit, consistently, depraved and contemptible, perspective.

It is conceivable to perceive Donald Trump as a rare, even sui generis, personality, whose contemptible behavior is, essentially and neurotically, based upon an unquenchable desire to demonstrate professed superiority and its consequential, success (even stardom), but is, in harsh reality, plagued with a fragile and self-conscious sense of precarious personal worth; the latter neurotically, necessitating an eternally, demonstrable public display of (faux) confident superiority and asserted empirical success.

We ponder the credible possibility that Trump’s demonstrated, ignorance and absence of human empathy, are, motivated by an insatiable, neurotic aspiration for public confirmation of his aspirational image and manifested professions of celebrity and empirical superiority; as opposed to basic contextual malevolence. Notably, in either case, the shameful, detrimental effects are, observably reprehensible.

From such a nuanced view, Trump’s persona can be perceived as sui generis (one of a kind) and not merely, a hapless “bull in a china shop,” but, who, wherever he may go, neurotically, brings the entire “china shop” with him.

Consistent with our perception, Trump’s, unexpectedly, large following can be seen as an enormous conglomerate of disparate, populist citizens, unified in their, disparate, malcontent, and perceive his manufactured braggadocio and bizarre behavior, in sync with their negative outlook, as a mutually compatible, indication of irreverence and rebellion against (the elitist) society and the latter’s assumption of alleged superiority and unjustified privilege.

Trump, himself, inarguably, evinces a total lack of personal political philosophy or dogma; his preferences are exclusively and primitively based upon who supports and pleases him. In fact, within the Republican House of Representatives the litmus test, for advancement, bizarrely and sadly, is whether one supports Trump, his election denial (“the Big Lie”), and his nefarious, Washington -based insurrection. His egocentric persona is all too willing to scrap the Nation’s Constitution and Laws, to achieve his ultimate egotistic goal, his autocracy, in the style of his admired avatars, Putin (Russia), Kim Sung Un (North Korea), Li Qiang, (China) and Viktor Orban (Hungary).

Whether one chooses to critically evaluate Trump’s harm to the nation as having its etiology, founded in his inclination to immorality, or to amorality, pure hedonistic evil, or compelling neurosis, the tragic impact on the nation is equally heinous.

Over the course of our writings, we have emphatically urged that the selection of Presidential candidates should not be based, solely and precariously, on the calculation of public political sentiment. Our Democratic Republic, (like other countries), is empirically, and unfortunately, saddled with a large population of citizens who observably evince an inadequate education and are poorly informed; inarguably, far short of the expressed criteria of Thomas Jefferson [“…for a Democracy to succeed, there must exist a sufficiently educated and well-informed citizenry”]. We have ironically observed that any civilian applicant, albeit for any mundane employment, has the mandatory requirement, in the interest of the prospective employer, as a prerequisite, to be found acceptable, after vetting and interviewing.  It seems to us, to be no less than a strict fiduciary duty, in the rational and pragmatic interest of the Nation, to fully vet and examine all prospective nominees for the World’s most powerful and impactful position, whose executive index finger is responsibly, said, to be “on the nuclear button.

-p.

We were disappointed but not particularly surprised, upon learning that Rep. George Santos has survived the recent vote to expel him from the House of Representatives.

Notwithstanding Santos’ repeated, sanctimonious claim, “I stand firmly in my innocence,” the wily Congressman from Queens, has been found to (1) Lie about a false Jewish ethnos, embellishing it with a deceitful account that his grandparents were Holocaust survivors, (2) make false and deceitful representations concerning his assets and net worth, (3) make  representations, under oath, that he was a financial advisor, despite possessing no assets, investments nor capital, (4) has been charged with money laundering and the fraudulent use of donated campaign money for personal expenses (viz. credit card debt and the purchase of designer clothes), (5) has been accused of passing a bad check in the State of Pennsylvania, (6) is the subject of accusations made by the Secret Service of participation in a criminal ATM skimming scheme, (6) has falsely claimed membership in a (non-existent) Animal Rescue Organization, and, further, to have rescued more than 2,500 animals,(7) has been accused of illegally, stealing other people’s identity, (8) accused of Credit card fraud, (9) of falsification of written records, (10) of making false statements to Congress, and (11) is the recipient of two dozen criminal charges against him.

We were disappointed to learn that with such an extensive record of nefarious, acts of falsity and criminal behavior, the morally depraved Congressman survived the official proceeding to dismiss him from the House of Representatives. However, taking into consideration the perverse unprecedented, context and atmosphere, extant, since the deplorably, immoral, and rudderless term, of Donald J. Trump, and, persisting thereafter, and its routine desecration of political ethics and morality, the decision to retain the egregiously immoral and deceitful Member of Congress was, not unimaginable.

The old adage, “One rotten apple can spoil the barrel,” gained verisimilitude and empirical significance, with the entry of Donald J. Trump into America’s political scenario. As the undisputed avatar and diagnosable practitioner of serial mendacity, Trump is deservedly, entitled to sole ownership of an exclusive patent, as well as the trademark, for the concept and populist brand name of “alternate facts.” Trump, himself, is empirically, the principal alchemist and conjurer of the dark practice of paranoiac conspiracy ideation and deserving of credit for effecting the metaphysical decline of objective truth and the consequent absence of meritorious and moral principle in government.

Politically, Trump’s legion (effectively, “cult”) of followers, seems to consist of an enormous populist conglomerate of (unsophisticated) officials and private populist citizens, collectively, uniform in the bearing of personal grievances. Disappointingly, advancement to leadership in Congress has become dependent upon a litmus test, consisting of the tribal determinative criterion of supporting Trump, in his autocratic, “Big Lie” (election denial) and the consequent violent, and transgressive, insurrection.

In such a transmogrified, fundamentally flawed political context and atmosphere, it was, simultaneously, disappointing but empirically, unsurprising, that Santos, a psychopathic liar, was not, deservedly, dismissed by the Republican-dominated Congress.

Since the political advent of Trump, who, among his many other nefarious characteristics, maintained substantial populist support, despite being a proficient practitioner of serial mendacity, There seems to be an unwritten but implicit understanding  (i.e., the “Merry Santos Clause”) that the practice of political prevarication, when conveniently, necessary, is a tactically, routine and mundane practice.    

It would appear that the formal discipline of George Santos would be professionally inconvenient to the members of the Republican majority in the House of Representatives.

-p.

This essay is supplemental to, and an extension of (#974, “The Hamas War against Palestine”). In the immediately, preceding essay, we observed that the unwarranted, cruel, and bloody attack on Israel, by Hamas, at one and the same time, constituted an inarguably, heinous and depraved act, and, as well, a maliciously, and brilliantly effective chess move.  Hamas was confident in its empirical expectation that Israel, a tiny Nation, albeit, possessing a world-class military capability, would fully retaliate for its horrendous attack (involving the psychopathic, beheading of babies, the rape of Israeli women of all ages, the burning of family-occupied homes, public executions, and the like). The pernicious, but, tactfully, shrewd aggressor, as planned, kidnapped hostages and quickly retreated to the safety of its substantial network of underground tunnels, constructed in Gaza, tactically, below hospital buildings and residential areas.

They did so in the expectation that Israel’s predictable response would, of necessity, be visited upon the innocent Gaza public, residing on the surface, above their extensive, well-supplied, safe tunnels. The anticipated, World response to such military retaliation by the attacked Nation imposed upon an innocent civilian population would, undoubtedly, ignite the wrath and the chastisement of World opinion against Israel. Hamas, well aware that it did not have the military capability to achieve its dedicated goal of the extermination of the Jewish State, could, by such cruel and pernicious stratagem, invoke world castigation against it and injure its widespread support and good standing. The resultant mortal impact on the Gaza population was the basis for our title, “Hamas’ War against Palestine.”

The perniciously conceived goal, unfortunately, was, successful; so successful that it, effectively, re-started that age-old and seemingly, never-ending, tragic Roku series, featuring the perverse and unjust hatred of the Jewish people. Perpetually nascent and abiding, and for the moment, peacefully, hibernating, anti-Semitism, was again re-awakened and is now on the rise, worldwide. In sum, it is our view, that the eternal narrative of age-old anti-Semitism, as empirically, demonstrated by its tragic and irrefutable history, was propitiously, awakened by Hamas, as it has been, historically, on so many other, unjust past occasions. In the course of World history, Jews were conveniently and irrationally deemed guilty for the advent of plagues, dry seasons, failing crops, and other naturally occurring disasters.

At a minimum, Jewish, citizens of the United States, and those of other countries, such as England and France, inarguably, are not Israeli, yet, now find themselves, the irrational recipients of an egregious increase in the plethora of hateful, Nazi-like manifestations of ancient anti-Semitism; this time, as noted, tactically, resurrected by the Hamas-inspired, analogous “Roku”- type, never-ending Series, featuring the unrelenting and unjustified, hatred of the Jewish people.

Such hatred has existed and festered since the Holy Roman Empire (4^th Century, B.C.E.) under Emperor Constantine, as explained by the (former) Catholic priest, James C. Carroll, in his world-changing and enlightening book, “Constantine’s Sword,” The book recounts the role of the Catholic Church in the advent and perpetration of anti-Semitism, in an effort to punish recalcitrant Hebrews who would not convert to Christianity. Jews were, thereafter, universally, stereotyped, mythicized, and targeted for their so-called, “exotic beliefs and religious practices.”

It is especially troubling, to receive media reports on the heightened, level of overt expressions of pernicious and primitive anti-Semitism on University campuses. Such institutions, which are responsibly charged with the development of the enlightenment and the advancement of the rational thought process of their students, are apparently, evincing a chronic, atavistic, and primitive end product, still suffering from ancient ignorance and Dark Ages, prejudice. It might be of some utility to advise certain of these campus haters that pro-Palestine is, distinguishable from being pro-Hamas or anti-Semitic.  

It is our information that Jews constitute only 2.4% of the American population yet, anti-Semitic incidents, remarkably, constitute a full 60% of its hate crimes. Mainstream America must recognize the danger of this current reprise of the ancient hatred and take steps to protect all of its citizens, on and off campus.

It is certainly, past time that the never-ending Serial presentation of anti-Semitism was removed from the historically continuing menu of Roku “app” choices.

-p.

Hamas, the militant Islamic, controlling party in Gaza (after the defeat of the ruling, “Palestinian Authority”) launched an unprovoked surprise attack on the democratic Jewish State of Israel in yet another, attempt to eradicate it from the face of the earth. The dedicated aim of this political-religious,  belligerent, military organization has, eternally, been to forcibly eliminate the Jewish State of Israel and establish an Islamic State, extending from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. In this attack, they managed, somehow, to get past the Gaza Barrier, evade Israel’s highly competent warning devices and invade the Jewish State. The brutal and merciless onslaught involved the killing of many Israeli citizens, rape of young and elderly women, the beheading of babies and adults, mass executions, burning alive citizens, while resident in their homes, and the tactical taking of hostages, military and civilian. The EU and the United States have since, decisively called for the permanent elimination of Hamas.

It is to be, relevantly and contextually, borne in mind that this was an attack whose purpose was based upon the singular, dedicated motive to eradicate the Jewish State, the latter, a Nation, established, historically, by International Law, for and by, the Jewish survivors of the World War 2 death camps and the many centuries of European ethnic and religious pogroms.

It is our personal view that Hamas has criminally and psychopathically waged a cruel and devastating war not simply against Israel but in empirical truth and tragic pragmatic effect, as well, against their own resident Palestinian population in Gaza.

The international world (inclusive of the Hamas militants) has long been cognizant, that the tiny Nation of Israel possesses an internationally, respected, military force. Hamas, in its devastating and impactful surprise attack, without doubt, was well aware of a predictable and substantial, retributive military response to its bloody aggressive action. Consequently, in keen but, malicious foresight, Hamas took civilian and military hostages, and retreated, not merely for military purposes, but strategically, for purposes of anticipated, global public relations, to their known, large and intricate network of underground tunnels, below civilian Gaza.

The Hamas chess-like strategy, as empirically, predictable, resulted in Israel’s anticipated substantial response and, as conceived, resulted in an unsolvable dilemma foisted upon the victimized and cruelly, assaulted Nation, to wit: its military response, unquestionably justified, necessarily results in tragic consequences, by military response, as a practical matter, borne by the civilians living in Gaza, above the stated, copious network of underground tunnels where its guilty military and its kidnapped hostages are situated. Israel’s predictable and justified military acts of retribution are, in accordance with Hamas’ tactically, anticipated intrigue, of necessity, unintendedly and tragically, would be visited upon the innocent Palestinian population;  the wrongfully, savaged Israel being, unjustly and predictably, the subject of reactive, outraged world opinion.

This perverse and effective stratagem leaves Israel with an untenable dilemma and unquestionably, reveals the pathological nature of a Hamas-intended, holocaust against its fellow Palestinians, and the empirically, revealed essence of Jihadist Religious virtue.

-p.  

---

In our continuing aspiration concerning the thoughtful selection of words, most expressive of our precise intention (especially, in writing), we have, at times, been obliged to borrow popular terms from another language; usually, French or German. Thus, in French, “fait accompli” to express determinate finality, “mot juste,” for precisely the right word, “femme fatale,” for a temptress; in German,” farshtant,” for the quality of emotional understanding, “ersatz,” for items that are artificial, or substituted, and a word which occupies the principal theme of this writing, “schadenfreude.” The latter describes the (perverse) pleasure derived from perceiving another person’s misfortune. It depicts a reprehensible emotion, which, in our view, is the polar (and neurotic) opposite of the laudable, humanistic feeling of empathy.

The essential direction of this writing consists of the expression of a candid, personal confession to the entertainment of that deplorable, concept and feelings, but, in a distinct fashion in bright contrast to the more common, malign, definition, but, rather in a nuanced, derivative, and societal context.

The many grim judicial events, presently, confronting Donald Trump, principally address his autocratic, and malevolent attempts at the eradication of American democracy. In previous essays, we have painfully enumerated the extensive plethora of his morally unconscionable, and legally impermissible acts, extending to, no less than, his traitorous behavior together with his acts in defiance of the United States Constitution, his empirically demonstrated, absence of moral compass, his corrupting influence on many American citizens, his tactical divisiveness, and his ill-conceived efforts to contravene the historically-established, uniquely democratic, American way of life.

Incomprehensibly, Trump’s extensive wrongdoing, snake oil demagoguery, and moral trespass unfortunately and appallingly, seemed to garner him substantial populist influence and endear him to millions of hapless, inadequately educated, and eternally, discontented citizens. This large horde of the discontented, underbelly of populists, conglomerated into a large, un-American cult of Trump worshippers, compliantly aping his shameless bigotry, worship of lethal weapons, opposition to governmental programs, including, health and safety regulations, social security, general welfare and healthcare programs, handicap and citizen rights black, gay, and women’s rights and, particularly, the fundamental, equal right to vote. The age-old chestnut reciting the “rotten apple that spoiled the barrel,” achieved empirical validity in the disastrous one term of this twice-impeached, and currently, multi-indicted past President. As experienced by normally socialized, mainstream America, Donald J. Trump, willfully, and intentionally, despoiled the progressive, American ship of state and its implicit voyage to the destination of universal equality and wholesome, freely expressive life, and rendered it divisibly contentious, confused, and entirely rudderless.

The Nation’s underbelly cult of Trump worshippers, under his malign influence, has effectively, destroyed its operative, two-party system, by tactical intimidation to the extent that there no longer exists a coherent Republican Party. Under Trump’s malign influence and tutelage, they have attacked the essence and basic foundation of our democracy, most evident in their election denial to the unfathomable extent of a revolutionary insurrection, voter intimidation, and related deceitful practices.

During his singular, four-year (twice impeached) term and persisting thereafter, Donald J. Trump has injured our Nation’s traditional standing among other Nations by the unique demonstration of behavior that, by analogy to the creation of haute cuisine, amounts to the culinary tour de force of combining the ingredients of the essence of amorality with copious amounts of clear and manifest immorality.

Trump’s arrogance, and absence of responsible morality, in combination with his signature egotism, are irrefutably, demonstrated by his famous, unabashed, televised boast: “I could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and get away with it.” Teflon Donald, for too long a period of time, had, in fact, empirically and boastfully, appeared to undermine the provenance of the singular, American axiom, “No man is above the law.” Congressional hearings, subpoenas, litigation, investigations, and the like, seemed to be ultimately fruitless and frustratingly indicated a confirmation of his arrogant and ill-advised boast.

Fortunately, it would now appear that even Teflon has a limited (chemical) “half-life.”  At the time of this writing, Trump has been officially charged with 71 criminal charges, is under four (Federal and State) indictments, including the procurement of the violent Washington insurrection, espionage regarding government secret documents, solicitation of voter fraud (being prosecuted under Georgia’s anti-racketeering Statute), prosecuted for tax and financial deceit, has suffered substantial damages for defamation, and is being prosecuted for bribery to cover-up his shameful liaisons with call girls.

It would appear that the proverbial “chickens have come home to roost,” and Donald Trump is, deservedly, besieged with the dire and painful results of his egregious, sociopathic behavior. In the context of the thematic concept of “schadenfreude, we are, admittedly, overjoyed at the (protracted) arrival of criminal sanctions and with the recent awareness that the egotistically deluded, would-be autocrat is facing much-deserved punishment and legal rebuke. This feeling of pleasure arguably, may technically or linguistically, qualify as “schadenfreude,” but in notable contrast to its orthodox application regarding an individual’s reprehensible and perverse inclination, is, instead, a societally relevant feeling of relief and of pleasure, in the moral and legal confirmation, eternally articulated in our Republican Democracy, that, indeed, no one can get away with, “shooting someone on Fifth Avenue.”

-p.    

There is little doubt that this year, a unique Nobel Prize in Evolutionary Anthropology will be awarded to the three-person collaborative team of Drs. R.U Cuming (U.S.A.), Jono Say (Philippines), and C.U. Incourt (British Colombia), for their original research and discovery of the “Paradox Aura.” Their breakthrough study will shortly appear in The “Journal of American Medicine” (JAMA), “Lancet,” and “Mechanics Illustrated.” After seven years of diligent study, the celebrated team has discovered a physical, external feature, referable to the multi-nuanced persona of Homo sapiens, previously, unseen and unknown.

The subject feature has a nuanced chemistry, causing it to hover, albeit, blind to the unassisted human eye, several centimeters above the human cranium, persistently, regardless of movement, haircuts, or head covering. Despite the fact that the investigating team found, after many failed experiments, that it was invisible to the unassisted human eye, it was barely but definitely, discernable by intimate exposure to the light of Northern forest fireflies and, slightly palpable after thirty minutes of exposure to an excited electric eel. This newly discovered human feature seems, clinically to initiate its appearance at age ten and has the potential to abide with the individual for the balance of his life. The earthshaking discovery was prompted by a passing review of the early, historical “science” of phrenology. The latter (disproven) analytic theory held that brain areas have localized, or specific, functions that could be discovered by nodules on the head. 

The brilliant, soon-to-be, Nobel Laureates discovered the world-changing, fixed-in-place, but ethereal, feature, was scientifically classified by them as “The Paradox Aura” The observed function of the phenomenon, empirically, is to act as an influence in the determinations of the individual, as an overriding check on reason or rational thought. It is inferred (subject to further study) that those individuals with denser auras have the unique facility to completely, bypass any hapless effort at reason and to, facilely, espouse non-factual observations and far-flung conspiratorial ideations; apparently, of a measure of popular use in the contested context of contemporary politics..

The subject, scientific, objective, and non-partisan inquiry, by the three innovative scientists, was effectively demonstrated by their objective and impartial inquiry, into the scientific causation of the “Paradox” phenomenon which was demonstrated to instructively, account for the remarkably, large number of loyal Trump supporters, despite his multiple criminal indictments and 91 major criminal charges. The full extent of the overriding effect of their respective auras would also explain their bizarre avoidance of the rational consideration, that life under an autocracy could conceivably, be unbearable.

An international demonstration of the egregious effect of the newly discovered, “Paradox Aura” is evinced by the large hordes of militant, Arabic protestors raging against an anticipated retaliatory action against Hamas; the latter, silent or possibly, compliant with the horrific, unprovoked, and inhuman attack against Israel, which included the killing of Jewish citizens, butchering of infants, burning of homes containing live Israelis, raping women and kidnapping children, mothers, and grandparents. This Dark Ages event, or, contemporary Middle East pogrom, cannot be fully evaluated without consideration, of the newly discovered dynamic that the egregious aura, when confronted by a sufficient and salubrious period of liberal arts education, regularly and prophylactically, administered between childhood and maturity, vanishes on a permanent basis.  

We, anxiously and impatiently, look forward to the exigent award of a Nobel Prize, for the discovery of a scientifically, effective method for the National promotion and personal inducement of the elimination of illiteracy and the promotion of education and thereby, the consequent elimination of the “Paradox Aura” and the (universal) reinstatement and increase of reason and empathic humanism.

  –p.

It might be a useful, albeit unusual, exercise, in the pursuit of accurate objectivity on occasion, to review one’s daily experiences in the pretended guise and context of an uninvolved, television spectator of an episode in a series portraying the scenario of his daily life, and to relegate his observations and felt comments to spontaneous, mental footnotes.

In one such participation, the series episode opens with the spectator- the protagonist, throwing off his blanket, sitting up slowly, yawning, and scratching his head and then his chest. Being a Saturday, he has allowed himself to sleep one hour later than his regular weekly schedule. He is seen, entering his bathroom, brushing his teeth, showering, skipping his workday shave, and then slowly proceeding to his modest kitchen to make coffee and to slice and toast an “everything” bagel to be buttered for breakfast.

The name is Harry, he is 33 years of age, single,  lonely, somewhat shy, has worked as an auditor for eight years at a large accounting firm, has an allergy to lactose, votes Democratic, and as his sole companion, has a small, furry, male cat which he named, “Anthony,” after his favorite actor, Anthony Hopkins. For recreation, he watches movies on television, on occasion, participates as a docent in the Museum of Natural History, reads John Le Carre, and, when in the mood, takes walks in Central Park.

He was born in Middletown Connecticut, went to primary school there, and subsequently obtained his accounting degree from Connecticut University. In his senior year, he fell, “head over heels,” in love, with a co-ed, a certain Anne Baxter, however, so evinced a chronic and uncomfortable shyness that, despite their full year of loving commitment, Anne decided to marry Randy Mahnn, the supremely, confident quarterback of the University football team. Harry was so heartbroken that he moved to New York, and took his present small, dark apartment on the Upper West Side.

On the day that Harry chose to imagine (as suggested, above) that he was a viewer of an episode, in a Roku series, based on his life, it had been raining heavily. Nevertheless, after breakfast, he, in the mental context of such a faux spectator “views himself” putting on his torn yellow raincoat, taking his umbrella, and venturing outside for a slightly wet, stroll along Fifth Avenue, on his familiar route to the Museum.

In this (his) selected episode, during his walk, he views himself happening upon a single, expensive-looking, sapphire earring, lying next to a wind-blown ice cream wrapper, at the sidewalk curb at 78^th  and Fifth Avenue. In this observed episode, he views himself picking up the beautiful earring and installing it, for safekeeping, in the right pocket of his rain-damp brown slacks.

His (self-watched) episode, later in the day, portrays himself stopping at an interesting-looking, well-stocked, brightly lit bookstore, furnished with tables and chairs for reading and drinking the coffee, there on sale. He would look for the latest novel by John Le Carre to enjoyably read in his easy chair. As Harry entered the bookstore he discerned a faint, pleasant, scent of perfume that, for some forgotten reason, smelled familiar. Luckily, he did find the new novel by his favorite author and sat down at an available seat at one of the reading tables to further examine it. The one other reader, at the table appeared to be a young woman who, at the moment, was standing, with her back toward him.

The episode reveals that, on the portion of the table in front of the woman’s chair, there appeared to be several pages of handwritten notes, a half-empty coffee cup, and, remarkably, an earring, identical to the one Harry had earlier found at a sidewalk curb and now resting, for safekeeping, in his pants pocket.

He tapped her on her back as she was still standing and facing away, speaking to someone, and forthrightly and confidently, demanded of the young lady, “ Miss, is this yours?” The woman was twice overjoyed in its discovery and return, and, as well in short order, identified Harry, her (now speaking with appropriate confidence), former college sweetheart. “Anne,” he exclaimed, simultaneously, with her equally, surprised shriek, “Harry” and the episode concludes as they passionately embrace.

In the next episode of the imagined, Roku series, Anne reveals to Harry her ultimate break-up with Lance, over his drinking problem and over-weaning taste for the opposite sex. The entire series concludes with a magnificent final scene, the joyous wedding of a determined and confident Harry and a loving and duly respectful, Anne.

We are not so naïve nor are we so sophomorically, bold as to assert that the exercise of the suggested technique, viz. imagining yourself a spectator of a contrived, episode of a serial drama, portraying your life, will invariably, result in complete success. Nevertheless, it would, at a minimum, be useful to have the opportunity to see oneself, as others may see you, the latter, in confirmation or perhaps, in contrast, to your subjectively, presumed self-image.

-p.

For some reason, a friendly area resident, Mr. Jono Sei, has developed a penchant for seeking us out for the purpose of posing “deep questions” to us. Conceivably, we should, be flattered by his (unsupported) reverence, however, there are times when we are, by reason of our neighborly efforts at compliance, made to suffer a self-conscious and uncomfortable sense of contrition. Recently Mr. Sei posed the following extraordinary question: “Why is it that none of the many colors of the forest happen to clash?”  After a moment’s thought, we came up with our response, notwithstanding the fact that, while he did not seem to easily comprehend, felt, accurate: “The reason the colors do not ‘clash,’ is that the appearance is consistent with your life experience, in observing forests.”

From a scientific viewpoint, our visual capabilities are based upon the transfer of light stimuli received through the eyes resulting in visual perception. The visual system detects light in the retina of each eye that generates electrical nerve impulses for the perception of color and light. Vision occurs when light is processed by the eye and, functionally, interpreted by the brain. It is our theme that the images generated by such scientific or organic bodily vision are then perceived in a discretionary or judicial context, based on prior life experience

Indeed, it is our view, that colors and, especially, the combination of colors, are evaluated by Man, for his aesthetic acceptance or rejection, by virtue of his learned, empirical experience. In this context, and in support of the present theme, we would again refer to the pronouncements of the English empirical philosopher, John Locke. Locke declared that Man is born with a “tabula rasa,” a clean slate, and that all of his knowledge is derived from his (empirical) experience.

 Accordingly, it is our view that by example, Man’s daily experience with the color and style of attire determines their subjective acceptability. The discretion on the part of the individual, is commonly a (shared) communal one, based on the degree of his desired effort at compliance with the styles and colors, learned, by observation, to be situationally and contemporaneously, appropriate in his society. In sum, it is a matter of his social experience, as opposed to his visual physiology, that is the determinant of his choice.

White, blue, or striped shirts with tie and jacket, midnight blue tuxedos and full dress outfits, blue jeans with short sleeves or “T” shirts, high heels with dressy gowns, denim colored overalls for farmers, gardeners, and mechanics, white jackets for medical or nursing professions, space suits for astronauts, white aprons for butchers and fish sellers, yellow raincoats for firemen, gray or brown tweed jackets for male history, sociology or philosophy professors, blue uniforms for policemen, black robes for judges, white outfits for bakers, black suits for funeral directors and elder- age mourners, orange suits for imprisoned criminals, V- neck sweaters for college sophomores, bow ties for elderly pharmacists and barbers, tan raincoats for movie detectives, berets for movie directors, are archetypical and stereotypic, assisting the empirical or traditional identification of (the assertion of) personal identity or function. As an illustrative example, it would be discomfiting to observe a surgical operation being performed by an individual in a fireman’s hat and waterproof raincoat.

It would pragmatically appear that the observance of the characteristic stylistic or experiential costume and color is a non-verbal assertion of status or individualized persona. The salient point is that common, societal experience is the effective determinant of recognizable and acceptable propriety. It may be said that the identical dynamic is operative, as well, in the case of our other human senses.

The forest looks the way it eternally has, consequentially, its nuanced combination of colors is perceived to be appropriate. The maître de at an expensive restaurant wears a tuxedo; brown does not look best with purple; and cream cheese is best enjoyed on bagels, all in consonance with the declarations of empiricist Englishman, John Locke; the latter individual, (unfortunately for him) having been born long before the praiseworthy, and gastronomically impactful, advent of the bagel.

-p.