plinyblogdotcom

  In order that this writer avoid the depressing conclusion that the empirical outcome of the Founder’s  “Radical Experiment,” in the creation of a Democratic Republic, disappointingly, evinces, the triumph of experience over hope, he finds it metaphysically, necessary to construe an explanatory ( sociological) assumption, viz., that the experiment, itself, has changed and has become more societally, convoluted.

It may be useful, as an explanatory illustration, to reference the mathematical discipline of geometry, in the understanding of the contemporary stress-laden condition of American society, in contrast to the Founder’s dedicated efforts towards a just, peaceful and utilitarian, Nation. In Geometry, one is presented with certain established propositions, (the “Given”) and by applicable, logical process, deduces the desired, conclusion, (QED). Utilizing such geometric lexicon, the Founders’ optimistic perception was, evidently, based upon a distinctly, differentiated, “given,” (societal milieu) than the contemporary precepts, held by mainstream, right-minded American citizens.

In 1787, when the Founding Fathers completed the drafting of the United States Constitution, much of the Planet had, historically, been under the abject rule of despotism, monarchial or ecclesiastical. The architects of our Republican Democracy intended that their archetypal and radical creation, avoid the unjust, autocracy of a Monarch or Pope, eschew the unjust class system, based upon “privileged” birth, and, establish a “universal” equality. They, optimistically, anticipated that the outcome of their unique experiment would be, the political antithesis of autocratic rule and privileged status.

We would confess to the complete, contemporary, inability, to, rationally comprehend the sincere and dedicated, aspiration to prescribe a “universal,” equality, but, one which was applicable, exclusively, to propertied, white male citizens. Many of the founders, like Thomas Jefferson and George Washington were, at one and the same time, slave owners, and advocates for “equality.” Excluded from the category of democratic, free citizen, were the enslaved black, whose legally, and socially, assigned, status was, that, of a mere agricultural chattel, the property-less male and the entire population of women. Thus, the status and complexity, of the Founders’ stated, “Experiment in Republican Democracy,” in 1787, was circumscribed, and, inarguably, far more limited in scope, and complexity than today.

Judging by today’s altered and expanded, criteria, despite the relatively, recent, legislated standard of equality of female treatment and, significantly, the grant of their voting franchise, the Nation evinces far less than universal compliance, with Statute, and case precedent, in the establishment of constitutional equality to Americans of color. It is the latter impediment in the main, together with certain (not unrelated) cultural factors (see, below) that continue to complicate the classic aspiration for a successful outcome from the great, experiment in Republican Democracy.

We would briefly, categorize and list the three salient factors, as we perceive them, most responsible for the added, complexity or enhancement, to the Founders’ (conception of) the “radical experiment in democracy.” Unfortunately, they uniformly, appear to be cultural, and consequently, difficult of amelioration. We list them, according to our perception, in ascending order of significance:

[Religious interference] The Founders, mostly Deists, all too cognizant of the historic, injustices and autocratic cruelties of the Church, clearly and unequivocally, made provision in our Constitution, for the non –involvement of the Church in governmental rule (“Separation of Church and State.”) The “Establishment” Clause, prohibits government interference with, or participation in, religion.

Nonetheless, the express prohibition against governmental participation in religious matters has been, at various, times, violated. The existence of “Sunday Blue Laws,” (now unenforced), alcoholic prohibition (now discontinued),  tax exemption for profitable Church institutions, persisting prayer at school and public events,  discrimination against trans-sex individuals and same-sex marriage, book censorship, and the most draconian, callous and life-threatening, the SCOTUS abolition of a woman’s right to abortion. The supporters of the latter, inhuman and unconstitutional strictures, tactically, and deceitfully, had arrogated to themselves the misleading name, “Right to Life.” That the falsity and misrepresentation of such name, (selected for public relations purposes), is inarguably, deceitful, is shown by their eternal opposition to programs of assistance to the needy child, (i.e., after birth), their general opposition to gun regulation (despite the plethora of tragic public shootings), opposition to refugee immigration, and support of capital punishment. SCOTUS’s banning of abortion was erroneous since religiously, based.

[Culture] The unfortunate, existence, in a Nation of a large inventory of a less than adequately, educated, and poorly, informed, citizens, poses an imminent danger to the existence of democracy. Founder, Thomas Jefferson, famously, declared that in order for a democracy to succeed, it is necessary to have an “educated and informed citizenry.”

That such basic and mandatory requirement has not been realized, is unequivocally, made evident, in the daily media and in personal experience. It is the large “underbelly,” of populist-ignorant members of the American society that is useless to any Nation that is dedicated to governance, by, and for the people. Moreover, it is this class that is most vulnerable to “snake oil,” demagogues, political and religious, and with the self-serving, financial support of anti-regulation big business, succeeded in the election to America’s Oval Office, of the autocratic, ignorant, immoral and biased, Donald Trump. We have, in earlier essays, previously, described his incapable and bizarre term of office (resulting in not less than, two, Congressional impeachments). 

It is among such populist underbelly, citizens that there exists, fertile ground for the perpetuation and transmission of delusional conspiracy ideations, and Christian White Supremacy militias, supporters of anti-democratic undertakings, not the least of which, was the Trump inspired, “false election,” or autocratic style, “Big Lie,” that, shockingly, led to the violent, January, 26 rebellion against the Capitol Building, in Washington, D.C.

Historically, the 18^th Century Founders had, naively, anticipated an entirely differentiated, population of Americans, who, in neighborly manner, would, regularly, and informatively, debate the extant, controversial issues. The result of the debates was anticipated to be useful as a guide to the Nation’s policymakers, as appropriate to a government, by and for the people.  Instead, differences in opinion led to sharp, divisive, rancor between insular, groups of like-minded citizens at “cold war” with other such groups, but of disparate opinion. The empirical character of the population had been optimistically, misjudged, no doubt, due to the Founder’s naive projection, of their erudite character and morally, dedicated, expectations. Again, the experiment had radically, changed.

[Race Relations] The 19^th Century determination, outlawing slavery, following the Civil War, regarding which, black enslavement, was the salient issue, unfortunately, did not, by any means, signal the end of the anti-democratic, dynamics of race prejudice. The problem was not an ingredient in the Founders’ declared “experiment,” since, as observed, above, they,  in the context of their historical period, did not (somehow) perceive that the agricultural enslavement of black human beings, was immoral or unnatural.

By contrast, the overpowering, moral and legal issue in contemporary times is that of white-nonwhite, racial prejudice. The absence of this issue in the early aspirations of the Founders for success in their conceived “Experiment in Democracy,” renders their archaic estimation of such experiment simplistically, irrelevant.

In, solely analytic, societal, (and in avoidance of the use of humanistically, reproachful) terms, the long decades of institutional debasement of the value of people of color, during slavery, has, to varying degrees, and for various possible reasons, been atavistically, and ignorantly, perpetuated, especially, but not, exclusively, in regard to many, “underbelly” individuals, but empirically, more significantly, in many of the Nation’s institutions and practices. In many cases, these are subtle and properly, denominated as white (usually, unperceived) privilege. The advocates for “Critical Race” education, are especially, interested in this latter phenomenon.

We have chosen to persist in our optimistic expectation, that the “Radical Experiment in Democracy,” albeit, demonstrably, enhanced, and complicated, will, in time, enjoy a result, universally, satisfactory to all right-thinking, moral American citizens.

-p.

[For a momentary diversion from the angst of the contemporary scene, we have acquiesced to a reader’s request to, once more, return to our exotic past. We have, previously, devoted several writings on our childhood, as first-generation progeny of poor Eastern European Immigrants].

By the late 1940s, our family had moved to the Brownsville section of East New York, to lease and reside in the downstairs apartment in a two-family dwelling, owned by our maternal Aunt and Uncle. It was at this era in the lives of myself and my twin (fraternal) brother that the relevant action took place.

It is because the currently, inauspicious coin, viz., the dime, has a prominent place in the adventure to be related, and, further, because some brief observations of the ubiquity of the same, in the 1940s, might be of assistance in imparting a partial picture of that singular period, we would indulge in a brief, but factually, related, diversion, concerning that relevant item of exchange.

The ten-cent coin, the “dime,” contemporaneously, occupying the hapless, financial status as a feckless nuisance, by contrast, had some significance, in an era when prices, and wages, were, so low, as to now appear incredible. Yet, in the 1940’s it was a minor, but, nevertheless, utilitarian, medium of exchange.

The coin’s ubiquitous significance in this era, was evidenced by the following, illustrative, uses: “The March of Dimes,” (fund for the eradication of polio), “Dime Stores,” (still in use for low-priced consumer marketing), “The Dime Savings Bank,” (would distribute, for deposit purposes, small cardboard dime holders, for saving the coins until the same reached, the depositable, total, $3.00), expressions like “a dime a dozen,” (of common character, ordinary), “In for a nickel, in for a dime,“(totally dedicated), “the car can stop on a dime,”(it has excellent brakes), the stereotypical panhandler’s request: “Mister, you gotta dime for a cup of coffee?” and so many other contextual examples.  Notably, the cost of a ride on the subway and the charge for the use of a public telephone, likewise, was the then, ubiquitous, dime.

Our “new” neighborhood, albeit, quite modest, conveniently, had a public pool, “Betsy Head Pool,” with admission at nine cents per patron. On warm summer afternoons, my brother and I would go there to swim, and took the price of admission from our meager weekly allowance. Our hard-working, immigrant father, like most other families in our milieu, unfortunately, was the recipient of low wages, and could not afford to give us a better weekly allowance.

As recalled, it was on a sunny, hot Friday, and predictably, my brother and I decided to go to Betsy Head Pool, where the price of individual admission was nine cents. Since it was the end of a week, we investigated the balance our mutual financial resources. Happily, we discovered that each of us, had retained, the identical sum of thirty cents (i.e. three dimes); sufficient to pay the cost of admission to the pool (.09) and the charge for the subway, going (.10) and returning (.10). Our mother gave us two towels, and, as expected, a greater number of mandated, instructions after which we went swimming.

We, at this juncture, each having remaining balances of eleven cents, just enough for our return subway trip, and upon exiting the pool, feeling refreshed and energized, we spied an Italian ices truck (lemon ices! Price, per cup, 10 cents). We were, at once, struck with frustration, and truly devastated, at our monetary shortfall. Italian ices, especially, lemon flavor, at this stage of our lives, was “Nectar of the Gods,” however, we each needed our dimes for our return subway trip.

We, sadly, descended the steps of the closest subway station with the intention to return home and discovered that the selected portion of the station facility was not central, but an auxiliary, unmanned one with simple, a turnstile for the deposit of fare, and a revolving door, which was mechanically, activated, and allowed entry into the station, upon deposit of the dime entrance fee.

We, shrewdly, looked at each other, then, wordlessly, ascended the stairs, and purchased a delightful cup of lemon ices, and, slowly and passionately, consumed it. Thereafter, we again, descended the steps of the deserted, auxiliary subway entrance, with only the wherewithal, (one dime) for one admission. We merely looked at each other as the cue for dynamic action. My brother, being the slimmest and most agile of the two of us, mounted himself, upon my shoulders, as I, compliantly, crouched. I then deposited the one dime in the turnstile slot, pushed into motion the now unlocked, revolving door and proceeded, shoulder-mounted with my sibling, into the train station, for our mutual ride home.

Prior to the described offense, and, moreover, in the seventy-five succeeding years, I have never committed, even the slightest, criminal offense. Accordingly, I remain eternally, hopeful that this singular, (ancient) theft of a dime’s worth of services, will legally, be barred by some applicable Statute of Limitations, even, possibly, annulled, so that, officially, I will be enabled to continue to exult in the recollection of a lifetime, of otherwise, unimpeachable, behavior.
-p.   

History might, permissibly, be defined as the study of change over time. It covers all aspects of human society, political, social, economic, scientific, technological, medical, cultural, intellectual, religious and military. The study of history, inarguably, is an intellectual discipline that aspires to construe a rational understanding of the past. It seems reasonable to presume that no historian can be 100% objective, and that reputable, historians try to recognize their own biases and beliefs and seek thereby to understand the subject of their study, in the context of how and why people of the relevant era, thought and believed. It is our view, that the historian accrues the moral and professional duties of objectivity and inclusivity of the myriad phenomena of his relevant period of interest.

Initially, and briefly stated, we give short shrift to the status, and utility of “partial,” or, subjectively, selected or abridged, history, and, accordingly, view the outspoken, opponents to the academic instruction of “Critical Race Theory,” as deceitful and tactically, political and duplicitous.

It is empirically, undeniable, that for the period of American History, 1776 to 1865, the law  (and establishment) recognized and enforced the determination of the status of the kidnapped and enslaved African, as a “human chattel” ( N.B., Matter of Dred Scott, SCOTUS)). The advent of the Eli Whitney “Cotton Gin” (Cotton Engine), exponentially, increased the commercial demand for plantation slave labor. History records that, following the Civil War (itself, principally, motivated by the issue of slavery) and Lincoln’s “Emancipation Proclamation,” the Thirteen Amendment was inserted into the Constitution, outlawing that base and immoral status. The painful recitation of such facts, regarding the Nation’s sordid blemish, of black enslavement is consummately, and uncomfortably, undeniable.

The insidious and tragic problem, as we would choose to describe it, is that, apparently, the centuries of hapless and unjust, cultural institutionalization of the status of the enslaved black person (now, legally and appropriately, an American citizen), seems to, immorally, illegally, and chronically, persist, among many atavistic and bigoted, anti-democratic, Americans. National efforts by government and mainstream, right-thinking citizens, to date, have resulted, disappointingly, in incomplete success in the Nation’s traditionally, represented, aspiration to, universal equality.

It is, predictably, within the large horde of right-wing, MAGA, conservative individuals that one finds the proponents of an arbitrary, major abridgment in the teaching of history so that subject matter, often referred to as “Critical Race Theory,” is eliminated, from the academic syllabus.  As declared, above, any subjectively, edited or selected accounts of history are misleading and entirely, useless. It is notable, that such major, abridgment, or omission of the Nation’s empirical history, appears to be ardently, sought by many individuals who seem to be election deniers, supporters of voting restrictions, opponents of liberal immigration and supporters of censorship and book banning.

“Critical Race Theory,” in its simplest description, is founded in the idea that racism is not merely the product of individual race bias, or “prejudice,” but rather, is a matter that is embedded in legal systems and policies. It is a retrospective, analysis of how racism has helped shaped public policy. The current opposition from its critics appears to emerge from an alleged fear, that white students will be exposed to damaging or self-demoralizing ideas.

Such alleged fears are obviously, specious and tactically false. What modern-day student is oblivious to the Civil War, to the media reports of the daily efforts of the Civil Rights Movement, to America’s past history of black enslavement, to the “Trail of Tears” and the Viet Nam War.

From responsible considerations of academic honesty to that of the pragmatism, mandated in our efforts toward progress toward universal equality, we need to recognize the totality of the American historical experience, inclusive of all that has, happened in this Nation, so that we can continue to create differential outcomes, where relevant, and become the Nation we say we are.

* Apologies regarding the title, to Cornelius Ryan, author of the 1976 Novel, “A Bridge Too Far”

-p.

If one were to inquire as to the date of the violent, insurrectionist mob attack on Washington’s Capitol Building, reactive to the election defeat of President Donald J. Trump, the expected response would be, January 6, 2021. Any informed American, from political scientist and newscaster for the public media to the more casual, lay observer, would, expectantly, so respond. One hears from the dedicated, investigative committees, that their proceedings are purposed to uncover the facts and hold the miscreant, participators, and their tactical supporters, responsible, “so that this un-American and undemocratic travesty will not be repeated.” It is the latter, quoted, portion of the statement of ultimate purpose that we find sophomoric and troubling, and that, responsibly, inspires the contextual theme of our present writing.

We have chosen to refer to the Nation, by reference to the common, employed, philosophical term, “the body politic,” to stress its status, as an admirable, but, vulnerable, organic creation. In the analogous and observable way that toxic diseases, empirically, possess the potential to diminish the health of the Homo sapiens, so too, does the dynamics of anti–democratic, bigoted and autocratic sentiment, invade, and existentially, threaten, the health of the vulnerable, body politic of our Democratic Republic.

To further exploit our elected anatomical, analogy, we would, relevantly observe, as commonly, known, that the occasion of an individual’s, overtly demonstrated, fit of epilepsy, is never perceived as a “one-off,” occurrence, but, rather,  a probative indication of a serious, chronic and continuing systemic malady. Its individual manifestation may have occurred on a specific, medically, recorded date and location, but more insidious is the fact, that the dread experience, predictably, will be replicated.    

Likewise, the sordid events of January 6, 2021, are empirically, not  a singular, or “one-off,” event, but, rather, represent but a recent manifestation  of an anti-democratic, pathology, which, like the epileptic fit, has a regrettable, historic, and systemic existence, (even prior to the aberrant term of Donald J. Trump, its latter day, deranged, avatar.) If it were possible to ascribe a positive dynamic, to this horrific and lethal event, it was its function as a grim reminder of democracy’s eternal vulnerability.  

Any cursory attention given to the errant mindset of the Nation’s, substantial hordes of autocratic sympathizers, would note the perverse,  existence of anti-democratic traditions, of racial and ethnic bigotry,  voting interference, opposition to responsible government health regulation, opposition to universal equality, to privacy, most, harmfully, to abortion rights, opposition to the employment of truthful facts, to the legitimate, established media, to freedom of thought (book banning and elimination of the educational study of the darker periods of American history), to anti-immigration and xenophobia, to individuals of, (inherited), non-binary gender, to acts of capitalistic compassion ( as, ”socialism”), to reasonable gun regulation, free speech and enlightenment. All such fascistic positions have eternally, been manifested by the Nation’s populist, enemies of democracy, and still persist, as its endemic and systemic, pathology.

In order to effectively, preserve the enduring, health of our Democratic Republic, we, as citizens of goodwill, are mandatorily, obliged, to remain acutely aware of the ever-present threat of fascistic infection, which disease, chronically, persists as an existential, threat to democracy. We need to eschew the hapless, understanding, that this, ever-metastasizing, vulnerability, was, restricted to the January 26, attempted coup which was, but an episodic, failed event. The latter, episode, as stated, did perform the service to mainstream America, as a revelation or, reminder of the pernicious existence of a populist, anti-democratic virus, that eternally persists and poses a lethal threat to our Nation.

One cannot resist a passing comment on Trump and his hordes of atavistic and ignorant followers constituting the “populist underbelly,” who mounted a Bastille-like, physical assault on the Capitol Building. In medieval history, the monarch and his supporters, traditionally, occupied a castle with their Court and military. What atavistic and limited intelligence on the part of the insurrectionists and their sponsors, could have perceived that the medieval-style, take-over of the Capitol Building, would effect a National coup d’etat? Trump and his less than literate cult, were dangerous and undemocratic, but, also delusional, and anachronistically, ridiculous. We remain hopeful that all of the participants in the riot on January 6, and their promoters (especially, its instigator, Donald Trump) be brought to justice.

We have often written, concerning the ever-present,  danger to the perpetuation of our Republican Democracy, posed by its regular, substantial inventory of inadequately, educated and poorly informed citizens, especially, vulnerable to extremist demagogues, in the nature of the  “poster boy” for populist purveyors of autocratic, and pernicious propaganda, viz., the abominable, but dangerous, Donald J. Trump. The mainstream American citizen must remain, eternally watchful of the activities of its populist underbelly, for further iterations of January 6, but most especially, for their persistent, daily, attacks on democracy.

For the present, Congressional, members who are steadfast believers in democracy, can advance the cause of democracy and universal equality in our Nation by passing the John R. Lewis, Voting Rights Act and the Freedom to Vote Act, purposed to combat the contemporary, wave of racial discrimination in voting and to establish and safeguard strong National Standards, regarding elections.
-p.

 We find it strikingly, unusual and selfish, that in a Nation, inarguably, populated by immigrants and their progeny, that the issue of immigration is so hotly contested. In general, Democrats are more welcoming to immigrants (especially, “asylum seekers”) than Republicans, most emphatically, the latter’s conservative constituents. The issue, disgracefully, appears to be a “game changer,” for many candidates, which is an indication that this “immigrant Nation” is sharply divided on the subject (The Statue of Liberty, and Emma Lazarus, notwithstanding).

The opponents of liberal policies of immigration, aside from those characterized by a lifetime of bigotry, argue that liberal immigration places a disabling strain on resources, such as residential spaces, schools, healthcare and public services,  that it exacerbates social conflict, that its maintenance and enforcement is too costly, that “illegals” who do not pay taxes, place an unfair burden on the American taxpayer (N.B. little, or nothing is said by them, regarding the Nation’s big businesses and billionaires who do not pay tax),  and that it creates competition for low-paying jobs.[ It is our considered  view, that it is the venal element of bigotry, itself, that  underlies most immigration objection.]

Proponents of liberal immigration, cite, among other things, America’s traditional history as a place of humanitarian asylum, its permissive Statutes affirming the propriety of immigration, the virtue in the responsible exercise of moral empathy towards the needy and afflicted by a prosperous Nation, and the frequent need of, special labor (viz., nurses from the Philippines, agricultural workers from Mexico).

We would, bravely, and confidently, offer an innovative and potentially, beneficial scheme which, if successful, could present the potential to reconcile all contesting interests on the subject (with the rational exception of America’s reprehensible and adamant bigots and anti-democratic, fascistic militias), but, additionally, and significantly, add to the strength of the Nation. However, prior to its revelation, we would cite some relevant empirical and historic, background.

Anyone who has taken an inter-coastal flight has undoubtedly, seen the vast areas of dry, empty, desert in the southwestern portion of the continental United States. The Nation, officially designated as located in the “Northern Temperate Zone,” is, nevertheless, occupied by no less than four enormous deserts ( in addition to an uncountable quantity of uninhabited prairie and grasslands). Of its four deserts (Sonoran, Great Basin, Chihuahua and Mohave) the Sonoran Desert, alone, contains 120,000 square miles of empty, barren and unused real estate.

A few years ago, when we were in Tucson, Arizona, we had the good fortune to visit its historical museum, which curated photos, clothing, utensils, tools, furniture and other relics of the Arizona territory, before the railroad. We saw somewhat, faded, photographs of ostriches, camels and mules, (the two latter, used as means of transport of goods) and the early settlers, living in the harsh, dry, infertile territory. These early settlers and their progeny, using common farm tools, reclaimed the arid, non-productive land and made it arable, commercial and habitable.
History relates that between the years, 1882 to 1903 thirty-five thousand Jewish immigrants (“the first Aliyah”) came to the arid, useless, forbidding, wasteland of the Negev desert and ultimately, tamed and improved it, albeit, with crude and inefficient tools, so that, generations later, Israel became a  major exporter of fruits and flowers. Few of the former ghetto or shtetel, residents, previously, had farming experience, notwithstanding which, to their credit, the lands were made fruitful, and life, viable, through the dedicated, efforts of these broken and damaged, human remnants of the Nazi holocaust, who were granted asylum in that young country.

Our novel proposed, solution to America’s immigration issue would result in synergetic benefits for the immigrant and the Nation. We would propose a program, in which the approved and willing immigrant, seeking a new home in America, for himself and family, be given employment in the reclamation of the vast, unused areas of American desert.* Our Nation has the assets and skills, necessary to initially, create livable temporary spaces, as well as necessary infrastructure for the willing and capable immigrant.

A preliminarily necessary, step would entail the employment of such willing and capable immigrants in the assistance of the government construction of their new homes, and, ultimately, (and most beneficially to the Nation) the reclamation of the non-arable land. In the modern era, the miracle performed by the first Israeli settlers could be replicated; this time with the benefit and assistance of modern construction and agricultural equipment, expert guidance and assistance. The positive, synergetic benefits, of this (entirely voluntary)  program, would be manifold, including, capital improvement (value) of useless, National lands, uncountable new jobs and salaries for American workers and engineers, as well as the trainee immigrants, and an increase in sale and use of American building materials and goods.

 Immigrants, thus employed, would, inarguably, and universally, be esteemed as a useful National asset, and productive, and valued, new members of the American family.

[*N.B. It is contextually, important to stress, that this proposal is intended to apply, solely, to volunteer immigrants, and that no conscription, whatsoever, is intended.]

-p.

Last week, fifty railroad cars of the Norfolk Southern Railroad derailed, in a fiery crash, in Ohio (near the State line, between Pennsylvania and Ohio). As reported, ten were carrying hazardous, toxic chemicals, which were in imminent danger of exploding. Crews hastily released the toxic chemicals that were in danger of exploding, into the air and began burning them, after the local residents were directed to leave the area, due to the imminent possibility of death.

Although our previous paragraph reads like an excerpt from the (1985) novel “White Noise,” by the post-modern author, Don DeLillo, it is, in reality, a terrifyingly, accurate, summary of that Friday’s news reports. Angrily, we thought of the myriad of vitally, important, governmental safety regulations, consistently, opposed by the Republican right wing and irresponsibly, eliminated by the former President, Donald J.Trump,                                                                                                                                            

The proximate responsibility and attributable guilt, inarguably, lies with America’s political right-wing legislators and politicians; the latter, financed by, anti-regulation, big business which, values profits over human life, and, in our view, may be clinically diagnosable as sociopathic..

It is frustrating and truly infuriating, to continue to observe the malign success that anti-regulation, advocates and lobbyists, have enjoyed, over the years, in tactically inculcating the Nation’s large, populist, constituency, to thoughtlessly and reflexively, respond to the asserted buzzwords, “socialism, or, “socialist” as a ubiquitous, epithet for un-American, or basic evil. Their adopted, classically, dynamic model, for this dynamic, was discovered by a well-known 19th Century Russian scientist who is credited with the developmental understanding of the “conditioned” (or “reflexive”) response to stimuli. In Dr. Pavlov’s, revealing trials, it was the hungry dogs’ response to the ringing of a bell; in the MAGA universe, it is merely the tactical assertion of the buzz- word, “socialism,” to alert the less than adequately, educated, right-wing constituents, to the purported existence of “evil” in what, in reality, are responsible governmental efforts to shield American citizens from harm.

It may be useful to once more, define the meaning and essence of “Socialism.” The latter term is a theory that comprehends the governmental ownership and control of all business and industry. There is not, nor has there ever been, a desire on the part of any American Administration, nor any possibility for the implementation, of such a form (or philosophy) of government.  Yet, bizarrely, the tactical designation of the term, “Socialism,” or “socialist”, is the “dog whistle” or Pavlovian bell, employed to elicit the desired and unfailing, negative response. It should be noted, that, as declared in an earlier essay, (“American Socialism”), it is the programs of compassionate capitalism, in our view, that have constituted the deterrent to any declared, need for an alteration in the form of government.                                                                                                                     

 The plethora of empathic, governmental programs, responsibly, enacted and designed to alleviate the suffering of poor and needy American citizens to be sure, are in no way socialistic. Nor are the many facets of the social security system (in which all conservatives, happily participate)  the federal FEMA programs of flood, tornado, earthquake, flood and forest fire relief,  postal and governmental health agencies, metrological and environmental agencies. Conservative politicians, self-interestedly, in acceding to the interest of anti-regulation, big business, shamelessly, and dutifully, assert that the prudent and responsible imposition of regulations, providing for the safety of transport such as mechanical efficacy, speed limits, safety at train crossings, transport of hazardous materials in close proximity to human habitation, and the like, are “socialism” (and ipso facto, bad);  however, the enormous cost to the governmental treasury, in restoration of the substantial damage caused by the catastrophe, which occurred, due to by the lack of application of relevant, prudent government regulations, regarding use and mechanical acceptability, is not. The tragic loss of life and health caused, on the date of the crash, by reason of the hazmat release has medically, been predicted to be exacerbated in the future.

Nor are regulations as insuring the purity of water, safety and effectiveness of medication, healthiness of food, safe and humane working conditions, safety of automobiles, roads, highways and bridges, air travel and too many other protective measures to enumerate, instances of the “dreaded” socialism.  

It would inarguably, appear that the greatest danger to the existence of a democratic Nation, is that of the grave misfortune of having a large, population of under-educated and poorly informed citizens.

-p.

.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          
 

There are certain conventionally, predictable and appropriate remarks, made on the sad and memorable occasion of the death of a dearly respected, friend or relative. Often thought and articulated at such times, is a wistful, inquiry, by the present survivors, of the deceased, on whose life he has had a significant impact, as to the quality and nature of life in the absence of such an incomparable person.

However, our presented sad and commemorative tribute, is not, dedicated to any recently, expired human being, but, dolefully, to the worrisome, departure of the aged, but existential, societal institution of interactive conversation (N.B., as distinguished from “talk”). The latter had functionally, performed the foundational role of a vital societal, epoxy, and, as well, by virtue of its definitional, interactive nature, informed the ultimate necessity of defining one’s self-image.

It was, during its remarkable, longevity, referred to as the “art of conversation,” with good reason. The intrinsic feeling of acknowledged, mutual acceptability, and commonality of interest, outweighed any felt differences, inherent in the most controversial of issues. Conversations between academically, oriented, individuals, were useful, provocative exchanges on subjects of mutually, dedicated interest and conceivably, could delimit, as relevant, insufficiently, examined, or, stagnant, assumptions or preoccupation.   In all such events, each conversant was pleased with the recognition of his academic status, and the mutual, affirmation of the jointly recognized, significance of the chosen subject of study.

In the case of standard, social or informational conversation, the parties, eternally, accrued the salutary, reaffirmation of identity and relationship, as well as the mutuality of their concerns, or points of view. In our view, personal conversation, per se, might have less significance than its consequential benefits, regarding the reassurance of mutually, perceived, relationship and commonality of concern.

In sum, personal conversation, in our view, is far more societally, vital than admittedly, enjoyable and informative; it occupies the office, in effect, of an existential, and comforting, mutual reaffirmation of the stability of the parties’ inter-active identity and the continued existence of a familiar relationship.

Assuming, thematically, the analytic role of a (literary) medical examiner, we are able to discern three relevant causes of death, (1) the popular, but ill-considered, choice of the minimally, communicative cell phone ( viz., the solo transmission of digital signals through a hand-held device, to be viewed at some indeterminate time in the future, in lieu of humanistic, expressive, and responsive interaction), (2) The  Covid pandemic’s, prophylactic mandate to refrain from socialization, and, (3) The long-standing, populist, trend to prefer ephemeral and trivial entertainment, to the exclusion of the many salubrious benefits, ultimately, derived from reading of good literature and interest in the arts and sciences, including, insight into oneself and others, and mature perspective.

It may, empirically, be said, that an individual’s limited awareness of his (inner) self, and, notably, the world around him, predictably, ensures a lifetime of ignorance, insecurity and protective (at times, defiant) insularity. It is such limited people who are especially vulnerable to toxic demagogues and purveyors of false conspiratorial ideation. However, this latter subject is extraneous to our present theme and has been discussed, at length, in previous essays. Nevertheless, it is conceivable,  contextually, that, if informative, enriching and uplifting conversation, were made available, and experienced, such limited perspective might be broadened.

The demise of conversation and its consistent and dynamic assurance of shared, mutual existence, has resulted in the atavistic, coarsening of society. The resultant feelings of isolation, diminution of mutually accepted membership in, and corresponding, responsibility to, society, have existentially, challenged the universally exigent, concept of moral compass, the existence of humanistic empathy and rational respect for truth and justice; just as it has, simultaneously, exacerbated, dividedness, fear and insecurity.  The media has already reported on an unprecedented, rise in mental illness, most particularly, depression and suicide among the disoriented, young. The undesirable impact can, further, be easily, discerned, in the observation of our growing hordes of populist, right-wing constituents, ranging, respectively, from the herd of feckless and useless, lemmings, to their devotedly, worshipped, Zeus-like, brazen and ego-centric, ignoramus, former President, Donald J. Trump.

It is with an almost, over-powering sorrow and societal regret, that we render our post-mortem homage to the memorable and existentially, vital, social institution of human conversation. Nevertheless, in keeping with our innate and persistent optimism, we are resolved to persist in the hope for its secular resurrection.

-p.

From a 21^st Century perspective, it would appear an insurmountable, aspiration to seek to exceed, or, even, attempt to replicate, the hubris, implicit in the vain, sacrosanct, English Victorian (Age) delusion, that it was, the innate, “White Man’s Burden” [Kipling] to evangelize and thereby, “civilize,” the diverse, non-white peoples, inhabiting the Nations, (Colonies) then flying the English flag (courtesy of the superiority of the English Royal Navy). The era’s shameful, injustice, tragedy and human suffering, brought about by this singular dedication (candidly, an apparent, rationale for slavery) can be, accessibly, observed in the written European history, and in relevant, art, novels, drama, and painting.

On the other side of the Atlantic, many peoples of color, having been, forcibly and inhumanely, abducted from their homes on the continent of Africa, to be commercial, exploited as lifelong, farm chattels. This shamefully, cruel practice, albeit, condoned in the King James Bible,  was, by contrast,  here, not morally and  tactfully rationalized as, having  evangelical, and, ultimately, beneficial, purpose. Such inhuman practice was concededly, commercial and entrepreneurial, and rendered especially, profitable, for white, southern plantation owners, by the advent of the “Whitney Cotton Gin.” Such slaves were legally, accorded the status, of inanimate, farm equipment, and so regarded. [Dred Scott case-SCOTUS-J. Taney]. In plantation scale cotton, apparently, there existed no needful, self-serving, evangelical, rationale of “saving souls.”

It required a tragic Civil War, followed by a traumatic National, “Reconstruction Period,” to adjudge slavery “illegal.”  Nevertheless, disappointingly, the American promise of universal equality to the freed black slaves and their progeny, to date, shockingly, has still not, been fully effectuated. Despite the relevant provisions of the United States Constitution, judicially determined, to be  applicable to all citizens (i.e., inclusive of people of color), the passage of numerous  Civil Rights Statutes, Federal and State, and a plethora of legal precedent,  legally, confirming  such  equality, many white American citizens, atavistically, and persistently, still, adamantly, refuse to acknowledge  America’s foundational, principle of universal equality, as applicable to black Americans.

The historical consequence of the above failure, has proximately, led to an inequitable, and unjust, sociological, or societal phenomenon, the nature of which, has observably, been termed, “white privilege.” The latter term refers to the myriad of ubiquitously, imposed difficulties and roadblocks, experienced by black, as distinguished from white, citizens. Empirical examples of such, inequitable and illegal impediments, are observed in notoriously, biased, arenas, including, employment, wages, housing, financial matters (viz., mortgages and finance applications), health care, membership in social clubs, treatment by the criminal justice system, access to higher education, voter interference, residential proscription and, on occasion, pricing.

Most mainstream American citizens, consistent with their acceptance of the fundamental, democratic premises of their Nation’s Founders, favor universal equality, on moral and constitutional grounds, and ardently, oppose discrimination. Yet, they find themselves, presently, opposed by a large horde of National bigots, supplemented, by former President, Donald J. Trump’s, underbelly, cult, of lemming-like, MAGA- inspired miscreants. The latter horde of atavistic and anti-democratic, citizens, inclusive of the many fascistic, National White Christian Militia gangs, seem to eschew no action, perceived, by them to be in support of their bigoted, autocratic pretentions, even violent insurrection.

To be clear, we, in the interest of contextual, emphasis and clarity of message, have begun this writing with a reference to the spurious, Victorian Age evangelical theory, subjectively and arrogantly, ascribed the euphemistic, name, “White Man’s Burden,” and its  utilization as a self-serving, euphemism, for the conquest, plunder and the domination of non-European people with darker than white skins. By moral contrast the dynamics of our present theme and conception, of perceived, general responsibility (as opposed to an inherent, “burden”) is the conception sought to be expressed. One, moreover, founded upon a  common, implicit, recognition of universal, secular morality, humanism and fairness, as opposed to one, justified by the arrogant presumption of Victorian, National and religious, ethnocentrism. An entire universe of difference, additionally and notably, exists, in that the selected, targets of such principled mission of promoting ethical American humanism and universal equality, are the recognizably, misguided and ignorant members of our very own American ethnic society.

The contemporary, white, American citizen, inarguably, can candidly, state that he may, justifiably, elect to assert his personal freedom of conscience, temporally, regarding any possible participation in the previous decades of slavery. However, believers in the traditional American promise, who share the aspiration for a strong and enduring, democracy and its implicit promise of universal equality, arguably, should have the will to accept the moral obligation (burden?) to eliminate prejudicial bias, and thereby achieve justice and strengthen the Nation. To be clear, we refer, only to one’s felt, moral obligation and not the purported, demands of an innate or religious “burden.”

We are of the confident opinion, that the salient reason that progress in the movement for racial equality has been slow in its achievement of progress to date, is the illogical and impractical assumption that the task of reforming the hateful bigotry, stemming from the ugly blemish of past enslavement of human beings in American history is, principally, the responsibility of the victim i.e., the progeny of the formerly enslaved, (farm chattel). For the sake of discussion, despite the differences in factual context, would the hapless victim of violent act of rape, be properly, assigned the societal responsibility of dealing with the rapist, or, pragmatically, should a Jewish survivor of a WW2 German Death Camp, be rationally assigned the duty of meting out plain justice to the Commandant of his former Death Camp?

We do not purport, to maintain that the Black American citizen, alone, is unable to carry on the good work of the Civil Rights Movement. There have been uncountable numbers of well-known, heroic and nameless advocates for racial equality (N.B, black and white). What we sincerely, do maintain, is that the morally inspired, white American citizen, appropriately, needs to actively, increase his dedication, personal efforts and participation in this essential, American effort, towards true and universal equity, and a truly just, and enduring, democratic republic.

-p.

With the advent of modern high-performance space telescopes (viz., Hubble, Compton, Spitzer), man has discovered, what appears to be an infinitely, endless, Outer Space, composed of innumerable, vast  galaxies, so remote from planet, Earth, that distances  are mathematically calculated in thousands of “light years.” We have come to realize, that our expansive solar system, is relatively, miniscule, in comparison with the size of the partly observed, Universe; which, itself, seems to be but a part of an unimaginably, awesome, Multiverse. The recitation of physical factors, such as distances, dimensions and other such features, set forth in scientific articles, in this context, is so extravagantly, awesome, that, with a baseline of empirical knowledge, merely garnered from life on this terrestrial planet, one cannot begin to rationally, comprehend, or even, imagine, the indicated distances.

Since man’s knowledge is exclusively, acquired by his empirical experience, [John Locke], it follows, that he is not, experientially, nor, potentially, capable, of the appreciation or comprehension of such vast, outer space dimensional concepts. It would appear, that the “sentient,” Homo sapiens, was relegated or, limited, to the contemplation of terrestrial, matters. The realization that humankind’s capability to live by reason (those humans that extol and employ reason) appears to be handicapped by his limited, earthly thought (and experience), perhaps, describable as “earth-centric,” caused us to deem it appropriate and relevant to rethink the subject of human epistemology. We suddenly, realized that Locke’s empiricism, logically, can be applicable and relevant, only to man’s life experience on earth and further, if there are alternate, objective, sources of understanding, scientific, or otherwise, man has been remiss in their attempted application.

Humankind’s, apparently, earth-centric and consequently, limited, quest for wisdom and enlightenment, entails the eternally, ubiquitous construct of question and answer. The foundational, underlying, premise of the rational and empirical method of seeking information, by the initial imposition of the relevant question, is logical and ultimately, useful, in matters, empirically, accessible, by way of earthly inquiry. Logic, mathematics, experience, and reference to experts or reference material on the subject are among the useful ways of attaining the determination of questions, or, solution of problems.

Mankind, in its contemporary, confrontation by questions which are not capable of empirical, answers regarding, non- earthly, matters, historically, had, traditionally, turned to religious dogma, for answers. The institution of Religion has always been an important and comforting, fixture in Man’s society. But religion is not factual, and has, inappropriately, been, used, to fill in the blanks, where empirical inquiry lacked desired answers. We are told that the Earth and its flora and fauna were created by an “omnipotent” God in six days, such an “omnipotent” creator, inconsistently, requiring the seventh day to “rest.” Scientific research, instead, universally, dates the age of the Earth at upwards of 4,400,000 years. Prior to Copernicus, religion stated that, since man is at the center of the Universe (concluded, prior to the-Hubbell telescope) the Moon orbits around the Earth. History shows that heretics were dealt with death, torture, or imprisonment.

The theme and context, of this writing, are not the hapless, criticism of Religion, but rather the debunking of the confident, aphorismic assertion, that, for every question, there somewhere, or somehow, exists an answer. Such traditional, and currently, outmoded, assumption, in our present view, appears, to be a clear manifestation of the egoistic inclination of an arrogant, Homo sapiens; the latter, an admitted, “sentient,” (but limited) marvel, of Charles Darwin’s, “Natural Selection.”

Some fundamental, non-empirical, questions, like the origin and nature of the immense, Universe, inclusive of our Solar system, and the unfailing, energy source for Earth’s gravity, should comfortably, remain, acceptably, factual, without the empirical, availability, or, the neurotically and arrogantly, asserted, necessity, of explanation or answer.

-p

George Santayana is generally given credit for the well-used phrase, “Those who neglect history are doomed to repeat it.” However, we prefer, the statement, to the same effect, by Ralph Waldo Emerson, “Foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, adored by statesmen, philosophers and divines.”

In a recent essay, “The Cain Progeny,” [Blogpost # 886] we dealt with the universal, two-sided persona of humankind, at once, moral, humanistic and empathetic, at another setting or time, fascistic and inhumane. The writing made reference to the fortuitous election to the Nation’s Presidency, of people such as Franklin Roosevelt and Barack Obama, and, by contrast, the disastrous elevation to the Oval Office, of Donald J. Trump; the latter, seen by most mainstream, traditional American citizens as completely lacking in moral compass, and historically, the least capable of the Nation’s Chief Executives. The persona of Donald J. Trump, has, by academic experts, indeed, been likened to, a political and egocentric reprise of Adolph Hitler. Like the latter, Trump and his substantial horde of followers, concernedly, have been and still are, an existential, threat to republican democracy, analogous to Hitler’s destruction of the democratic, Weimar Republic in the 1930s. Trump has followed the autocratic-fascistic, playbook, in his, “Big Lie,” i.e., failure to concede his election loss to Biden, his deprecation of factual truth, derogation of the media, bigotry, deceit and unchecked, immoral self-interest. His cultish followers, despite his two impeachments and criminal behavior, nevertheless, urge him to run again for the American Presidency. Should their aberrant wish be granted, one might, conceivably, doubt the survival of our republican democracy.

The extant, empirical accessibility of such aberrant and incapable individuals such, as Donald J. Trump, to run for the Office of the American Presidency, is the thematic foundation for this essay. Yet, while Trump, in our estimation, is deserving of the blue ribbon for incompetence in office and immorality, our readings of American History, advise us that he was not the only flawed Chief Executive. We would, accordingly, ask, should any, desirous populist candidate, regardless of persona and capability, responsibly, be deemed, eligible? Isn’t past experience educative, as wisely, suggested by Santayana and Emerson?

It seems incredible to comprehend our extant, bizarre, state of affairs in which an applicant for an everyday job, viz., as a draftsman or an insurance salesman, as examples, must undergo, a preliminary interview and, successfully be adjudged as qualified, as a mandatory, prerequisite to his employment, but not the leader of the most powerful Nation on the planet.

What we would, beneficially,, suggest is that a bi-partisan or non-partisan, panel of competent experts, derived from politics and academia, thoroughly vet all aspirants for nomination for the Presidency (and, perhaps, as well, other high office), psychologically, educationally and experientially, to determine, his or her fitness (including nuanced, persona) and competence, should such aspirant for office, be nominated and successfully, elected. we would, additionally, and emphatically, urge that among the grounds for disqualification to run for office, should be the proven record of the particular aspirant for candidacy as having, at any time, been an “election denier,” regarding an election result which has been certified, as accurate and fairly conducted.  

Our Nation, must never again, be subject to an election by democratic means, of a would-be, autocrat, whose nefarious goal is to undermine that (our) democracy, like a predatory fox in a henhouse.

-p.