Time To Move On?

William Barr took 48 hours to produce a four page summary of Mueller’s report, which took 22 months to produce. That Barr is one heckuva summarizer! He’d be invaluable to Reader’s Digest, assuming anyone still reads Reader’s Digest (does it even exist?). In those four pages, Barr is widely reported as saying Mueller found no evidence for conclusion or conspiracy with the Russians. He also says that Mueller, while finding evidence that Trump obstructed justice, did not find conclusive evidence for that crime. And so Mueller (incredulously, it seems) decided not to make a recommendation on the question of obstruction. Barr then graciously stepped and in made the hard (and unilateral) decision: Not enough evidence to charge obstruction. Whether this was Barr’s decision to make, or should it have been left to Congress (who, rather than Special Prosecutors, made such determinations when Nixon and Clinton were invesigated) is a question being hotly debated by every news outlet other than Faux News.

So the question before the Democrats and others who oppose Trump and his corrupt administration might now be characterized as: Is it time to fold our tents and drop this whole issue of campaign malfeasance by Trump and his associates?

Certainly there are political considerations that argue for dropping the fight. Democrats will likely not be able to leverage the 2016 campaign brouhaha in the 2020 election, and indeed, continuing to shake that tree runs the risk of turning public opinion against their efforts rather than gaining any new converts.

But there are aspects of the whole roll-out by Barr that feel less than fair and wholesome. First of all, there is the infamous 19 page memo Barr wrote as his job application to be Attorney General. The main thrust was his contention that the President cannot be charged with, nor commit, obstruction of justice, simple because he is the President. In particular, he claimed that the Mueller investigation into obstruction was wrong-headed and absurd. Many (most?) legal scholars have ridiculed Barr’s assertions in that memo. Barr, as a strong proponet of the “imperial presidency” (he would have been warmly welcomed by Alexander Hamilton), is almost the last person who could, without bias, declare Trump summarily innocent of obstruction. Especially given that he wrote this memo. Having Barr decide in lieu of Mueller’s abdication on the matter is a lot like having the fox decide whether the henhouse needs guarding or not. It is basically a foregone conclusion.

Furthermore, I am not convinced that Mueller ever thought that, in leaving the question of obstruction unresolved, intended that it be decided by the Attorney General. In fact, the whole idea that someone of Mueller’s known fortitude and resolve would actually leave the issue unresolved seems questionable in itself. Mueller has not been known for backing away from tough choices.

The question of collusion (ie, conspiring) with the Russians is also not so cut and dried. Yes, Mueller definitely said there was not enough evidence to bring the charge beyond a reasonable doubt, which was the standard for every indictment brought by (or referred by) the Mueller team. Based on the statement in Barr’s summary declaring no collusion, Trump and the GOP have claimed complete vindication on the matter. But to decide there was not enough evidence to bring the charge is not the same as saying there was no evidence. Hell, there’s plenty of evidence in the public domain to suggest some sort of collusion.

Both of these gray areas are reasons why it is critical that the Mueller report in its entirety be made public. Furthermore, it is just as critical that Mueller himself testify before Congress w.r.t. his thinking about the obstruction evidence. Did he intend for Barr to make that decision, rather than, say, Congress? Why did he decide, against everything we know about the man, to punt on deciding whether the obstruction evidence warranted criminal proceedings? Did it have anything to do with the current DOJ policy of never indicting a sitting President?

In the meantime, Barr’s summary, regardless of what is revealed when the full report comes out, gives Trump and GOP the opportunity to claim full vindication. Note that since Barr’s summary was released on Sunday, Trump, et al have been shouting from the rooftops how Trump is “completely exonerated” (even though even Barr’s letter explicitly says he was NOT exonerated). This basically gives them a leg up in the court of public opinion, where there is never much attention to detail.

Having gained this shot of poltitical capital, Trump has wasted no time in using it. His first expenditure: a new attempt to completely overturn ACA, this time in the courts. Not just selected portions of the law, but the whole shebang. One can only shudder in anticipation of the chaos that would be unleashed in our health care system were they to succeed. Trump is demanding that the investigators be investigated, claiming terrible personal harm from the two years he was investigated. Senator Linsday Graham wants to open an investigation to determine whether Obama tried to prevent Trump’s election. Note that Obama was the man who decided NOT to reveal the ongoing counter-intelligence investigation (involving Trump) during the campaign lest it be interpreted as an attempt to sway voters.

Is this significant reversal in fortune enough to turn the 2020 election to Trump? I for one will be very interested in seeing Trump’s polls numbers from before the Barr summary and after. But there can be no doubt that he will receive some positive bump from this episode.

So the primary question before those of us who oppose Trumpians with every fiber of our being is this: Is it in fact time to stop worrying about the 2016 election campaign shenanigans and instead focus solely on efforts to unseat Trump in 2020? That focus would certainly involve articulating our positive vision for what is needed to make America move forward into the 21st century:

how to negate the existential threat to humanity of climate change
how to make our elections secure from interference
how to reverse the trend of voter suppression
how to humanely and fairly deal with border security
how to achieve racial, gender and sexual equality
how to continue to improve healthcare for all Americans
how to once again make America respected among the nations of the world, instead of ridiculed

And even if the results of the Mueller investigation offers no slam-dunk damnation of Trump’s actions in that campaign, the spin-off investigations provide endless opportunity to present strong arguments to be used in the 2020 election. He stands at the apex of a morass of corruption and financial crimes to ignore. It is an embarrassment of riches in terms of targets to use. Not to mention the widespread corruption that has basically defined his entire Cabinet and administration.

But even with that as our focus, I do not believe we should simply walk away from the Mueller forum. The report must be made public. Mueller must testify before the appropriate House committees, as must Barr. But, as the Wicked Witch said, these things must be done delicately. And we must be prepared to weather the shitstorm that Trump, the GOP and Fox will unleash in retribution for “winning”.

The only moving on we should concentrate on is the one exemplified by MoveOn.org. Fight against authoritarianism and corruption. Fight for equality and justice. Stay informed and stay involved.

Our nation’s future depends on it.

Report Card

Okay. The Mueller Report is done, his investigation is complete, he’s given it to Barr. That central focus of the last two years is soon to be in the rear-view mirror, at least w.r.t. the Special Counsel’s efforts.

It all seems a bit anti-climactic, at least here in the first 24 hours after the report was dropped. Like so many, my attention has been riveted to the ongoing saga: the indictments, the trials, the convictions, the investigations that were spun off. Like everything else in the Trumpian universe, there was simply too much of it to process; the overall miasma of wrongness was so complex and intertwined that it defied efforts to comprehend it. But it was nevertheless impossible to look away. To think the primary investigation is over and done is akin to that deflation that I used to feel after all the Christmas packages had been opened. Sitting amid the chaos of paper and ribbons and boxes, the feeling was “What? No more? That’s it?”

Except of course, we know there is more: more investigations, more revelations and almost certainly more indictments. But the thrust of these ancillary actions are, by all accounts, with regard to financial corruption. Definitely enough to eventually put more people in jail. But not likely to affect the ongoing damage to national security, international affairs, elections jeopardy, and the tidal wave of corruption that Donald Trump has unleashed on our nation. On the question of Russia and the 2016 election, the endgame of the Mueller investigation, with its notable lack of indictments against Trump and his family, seems to have come up short.

So let’s recap. These are the cogent points.

The report is done. The Mueller Show has closed down, tents folded, Nothing else will come from this fount of many legal blessings.
We don’t (yet) know what is in it. Attorney General Barr has pledged to be “as transparent as possible,” and to even work with Mueller and Deputy AG Rosenstein to determine what can be made public. That may be a good sign, but Barr’s stated positions on the power and immunity of POTUS make his intentions suspect. Time will tell, and it needs to be as short a time as possible.
There are no more indictments coming from Mueller, and in particular, there are no accusations of conspiring with the Russians. This is perhaps the most distressing of the apparent conclusions. The infamous June Meeting in Trump Tower and the trip by Eric Prince to the Seyschelles to meet with a confidant of Vladimir Putin seem to be open and shut instances of Russian coordination. The demonstrable perjury by Don, Jr., Eric Prince and others would seem to require indictment. And surely to God obstruction would be an open-and-shut case, even when it was largely done in the public forum, open to see for everyone.

If this is all that comes out, it is evident that Trump and his minions will claim, arguably with some basis, that they are completely vindicated. Their victory lap will play like gangbusters with the GOP base. Even given the circle of convictions that surround the President, and the cloud of corruption being tracked down by the Southern District of New York, the fact that most people never dig very deep into the facts will likely mean Trump’s numbers will get a boost. Without direct evidence damning him, Donald Trump may very well emerge much stronger, and the Democratic strategy and tactics to unseat him will require a definite shift, or else run the risk of losing the impetus of outrage that currently fuels the opposition.

The bottom line is that we run a great risk of Donald Trump being reelected. And that would all but complete the re-normalization of America’s expectations of what constitutes a legitimate President of the United States.

And that would be the worst long-term damage of all.

Beto, Biden & Bernie

Here we go. The Democrats are off to the races to decide who will face the huge pile of certifiably insane orange excrement our country currently boasts as its President. In terms of the continued viability of our Republic, there’s never been a more important election than the one we will have in 2020. If Donald Trump were by some outlandish set of circumstances to again win the presidency, the long-term damage to America would be incalculable.

Given the stakes, some would find cause for concern at the sheer number of Democratic candidates, either already announced, or almost certainly assured of announcing. So many faces and voices might serve as a distraction. But the primary process is inexorable: eventually one candidate will emerge. And regardless of who that individual turns out to be, every single voter who truly cares for our nation must be committed to vote for that person. There is no room whatsoever for the ideological errors of 2016. The overarching guiding principle must be, “Donald Trump cannot be allowed to stay in the White House. Period.”

But the yellow brick road through the primaries has yet to be trod. At this end, standing in the center of Munchkinland, just taking our first steps, there is great latitude, and a dizzying smorgasbord of candidates on the menu. Ultimately, this is a good thing. These people will provide useful ideas to be explored, more options from which to pick and choose. One of the best lessons of 2016 was seeing how Bernie Sanders, even in defeat, significantly moved the Democratic needle to the left and to a more progressive platform. His ideas have become solid in the minds of many, if not most, Democrats.

As the horses stamp and stomp around the starting gate, it is already clear that a definite set of favorites has emerged. Polling reveals that Bernie Sanders and Beto O’Rourke are leading the pack, at least among those who have announced. Joe Biden has not yet announced (other than by a slip of the tongue, the sort of thing that endears Joe to lots of supporters). Even so, Joe regardless actually leads many of the polls. Another metric is fund-raising, and in fund-raising, Bernie pulled in an record-breaking $5.9M on the first day of his announcement.

Beto then raised $6.1M on his first day.

Even given his popularity and his fund-raising ability, for some reason, Beto has immediately become the recipient of a barrage of fairly harsh criticism… from fellow Democrats. The primary (stated) reason for this castigation seems to be a perceived lack of specificity by O’Rourke w.r.t. policy specifics. But the underlying problem feels more like disdain for a man who has “white privilege.” The fact that Beto is neither a person of color nor a woman has somehow made him a target for many Democrats.

Look, Beto has freely admitted that he has had a life that benefitted from white privilege. That’s a problem in American life that he is actively working to correct. As for policy specifics, this is not the time in a campaign to nail those things down, not withstanding the fact that he did articulate policy points in his contest against Ted Cruz. This is the time for generating enthusiasm, raising campiagn funds and building a team of advisors and strategists to help win the primaries, and then the election. And there is simply no other person in the Democratic field that even comes close to generating enthusiasm like Beto O’Rourke.

Beto has been compared to Barack Obama, and how he presented himself in the early days of his campaign. The comparison is an apt one. Both men have an energy and a charisma that just naturally draws people to them. Infectious is a good description. Both project an integrity and a powerful optimism that calls forth our better angels.

The same could reasonably be said for how Bernie Sanders campaigned in 2016, when he drew large and extremely enthusiastic crowds wherever he went. And Joe Biden certainly has a wide appeal and a good heart, and that cannot be denied. But both men are ancient. Biden is 76, Sanders is 77. They would be in their 80’s in their first term as president.

As much as these elder statesmen have done for America, as progressive as their ideas are, we cannot afford to put our fate in the hands of men that old. The Presidency erodes a person like no other job on earth. The pressures are unrelenting. Donald Trump is an anomaly in so many horrible ways; he simply ignores the overwhelming responsibilities of the office, and so is untouched by its life-draining nature. The man whose job it will be to undo the travesties Trump has perpetrated on our nation will have even greater than usual stress and pressure.

Beto O’Rourke will find advisors; members of Obama’s team have already started to join him. He will fill in the blanks on planning and policy. And along the way, he will snowball and concentrate the positive enthusiasm we need to both defeat Trump and turn the ship of state around.

I think O’Rourke deserves our support and our vote. Time will tell its tale, but, unlike Han Solo, I have a good feeling about this.

Eat An Impeachment

“Let us go then, you and I,
When the evening is spread out against the sky
Like a patient etherized upon a table…
In the room the women come and go
Talking of Michelangelo…
Do I dare to eat a peach?”

“The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock”, T.S. Eliot

It is difficult to overstate the negative impact that occurred when Civics ceased to be a mandatory high school or junior high class. I took Civics in the 9th grade at Carr Junior High in Vicksburg, Mississippi. (The fact that such a thing as “junior high” still existed pretty well dates me.) I cannot remember the teacher’s name (Harwell? Hargrove?), but I recall not liking him very much. I don’t even remember whether he was a “good” teacher or not. But I do remember the subject, which means I was taught how our government is organized: the separation of powers, the bicameral legislative branch, how the number of representatives is calculated, why senators have a 6 year term and representatives only a 2 year term, how the Electoral College works. All of that (at the time) was boring material, but which, as it turns out, was incredibly important.

And I learned about the process of impeachment.

Although the current blanket wave of news coverage likely makes it unnecessary, here’s a quick recap of how impeachment works. Many people mistakenly confuse impeachment with removal, but it’s only the first step on a path that may or may not lead to the removal of an officeholder. Impeachment is like an indictment. The House of Representatives, if it decides by a simple majority, can impeach a President, or a Vice President, or a Supreme Court Justice, or any civil office holder. In so doing, they have only accused that person of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” In order to be removed from office, the Senate must then hold a trial (which is presided over by the Chief Justice of SCOTUS). In order to convict, the Senate must decide by a 2/3 majority that the target of the impeachment is guilty.

And there’s the rub. There is no doubt whatsoever that the Democratically-controlled House could vote to impeach Donald Trump. There is an equal absence of doubt that 2/3 of the Senate would never convict him, regardless of the quantity and quality of the evidence brought to bear on such a decision. The GOP in Congress has locked itself in a death grip with Trump, and there is no indication that they will relinquish that hold, ever. They have lashed their fates to the mast of his ship of state, and they will not even pretend to independence, even if the ship is plunging to the ocean’s depths. Why? They either live in abject fear of losing their seats in the Senate or the House, knowing that Trump’s base would turn on them like mad dogs should they oppose Trump. Or else they are complicit with Trump, and share his authoritarian “philosophy”, and are willing, even eager, to subvert the Constitution, the democratic process and the rule of law. Not to mention (and this applies to everybody) the chance to suck at the teat of unabashed corruption, on a scale not seen in this country since the days of Teapot Domes and the Whiskey Ring.

Nancy Pelosi has made noises in the last few days that this political reality makes the idea of impeachment a non-starter. Knowing that conviction is not even a possibility, she has said that impeachment itself is futile. “Donald Trump is not worth it.”

It is true that the political reality of a failed impeachment (ie, bring articles of impeachment, but fail to get a conviction, as happened with Bill Clinton) would likely strengthen Trump, at least with his base. And it would also likely weaken the Democrats, or that is certainly possible. Aiming the gun but not pulling the trigger could be ruinous. Failure to convict would be seen as weakness for the Democratic party, or even weakness of the case against Trump, although the truth would be that the Republican senators would never vote to convict Trump regardless of the evidence.

So it is difficult to see Pelosi’s aversion to bringing articles of impeachment as anything other than a purely political maneuver, an action grounded in fear rather than principle, and therefore no more defensible than those Republicans who fail to stand up to Trump out of fear of retaliation. But an impeachment of Trump is so clearly required, failure to do so is basically an abrogation of the Constitutional duty of the House. It must be done simply because it must be done. It is impossible to think of a President more deserving of impeachment than Donald Trump.

Consider the two instances where a President was actually impeached and brought to trial. In 1868, Andrew Johnson was impeached because he ignored Congress and replaced the Secretary of War in violation of the Tenure of Office Act. Basically, the whole affair was a squabble between Johnson and Congress. The Senate failed to convict by a narrow margin. Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction, basically because of his actions in the Monica Lewinsky affair. The perjury charge was acquitted by a 10 vote margin, though the obstruction charge was basically a tie, which counted as acquittal.

Now compare the charges and actions of these two Presidents against the avalanche of corruption, obstruction, perjury and almost treasonous actions by Trump. The litany of wrongs, even those just in the public domain, is so vast and so overwhelming, that we have become essentially inured to drumbeat of his wrongdoing. Indeed, the sheer magnitude and frequency of his daily lies and misdeeds have served to come dangerously close to redfining “normal” for our nation’s expectations of “acceptable behavior”. It is so exhausting that it takes all we can do to simply maintain vigilance.

So impeachment is not only a moral imperative for this President, it should be regarded as absolutely necessary. But one has to admit that the timing is critical. No, Trump would never be convicted by the spineless Republican cowards in the Senate. But the investigation that would be part and parcel of impeachment proceedings would be the thing that could put the spear in the heart of a Trump re-election campaign. Mueller’s investigation is constrained by the warrant he was given: look for Russian interference in the 2016 election, and possible conspiracy with the Trump campaign. In the course of his investigation, Mueller has unearthed a treasure-trove of related corruption, and indicted and convicted key figures in Trump’s orbit. But the evidence brought to light have pointed to MUCH more than Russian collusion, including tax fraud, bank fraud, obstruction, witness tampering, and a host of other crimes.

Therefore, I agree we should not “dare to bring an impeachment”, at least not just now. Let the Mueller report be made. Simultaneously, let Elijah Cummings and Jerry Nadler and Adam Schiff continue to probe and investigate and subpoena. Hell, create a House Select Committee on Trump Corruption, like the House Select Committee on Benghazi, and dig even deeper. Bring as much to light as possible.

Then, in time to have the greatest impact on the 2020 election, so that the public can see it all laid out, impeach the motherf**ker. He NEEDS to be impeached, he deserves it more than any one in American history. Let the trial hound him right out of office and into the arms of whatever indictments the Southern District of New York has waiting for him. Let him and his family spend years in jail. Let justice be done.

That will be so much better than merely talking of Michelangelo.

Pentacoda

Popular music has a certain regularity, doesn’t it? Hell, for the most part, “regularity” doesn’t begin to describe the repetitiveness that has always characterized the music we hear on the radio or CD. Oh, sure, occasionally, some true departures occur. One need only think of Frank Zappa for the truly bizarre. More accessible, perhaps, but nevertheless undeniably, well, different would not be an inappropriate description for Steely Dan. We can all think of examples that bend the norms.

But for the most part, we expect our favorite tunes to be in 4/4 time, with a recognizable repetitive pattern. We’re probably wired and some deep level to sort of resonate with such patterns. So much so that when the pattern is broken, it leaps out, if not actually jarring our sensibilities, then at least causing a psychic twinge.

I wanted to mention one very innocent such departure, a rhythmic anomaly that occurs every now and then. I call it the pentacoda. It’s not a real coda, but it does generally happen near the end of song, as codas do. (BTW: if you take the time to read through this little essay, I won’t blame you if you wonder, “What the hell is he talking about? And why spend valuable brain capacity on such a nothing?” Well, we all know there’s a ton of horrible crap going on out in the real world now, and I just wanted to give my soul a rest, and think on lesser things.)

Anyway, here’s what I mean.

Near the end (or sometimes the beginning) of some tunes, the music repeats a phrase, perhaps vocally, but maybe just musically. After a number of repeats, the song exits the repeat and, well, does whatever it does. Finish up usually. But here’s the thing. Our brains are accustomed to, in general, expect the phrase to be repeated 4 times, or perhaps a multiple of 4. Almost all popular music is based on four. Yes, there are some waltzes, and 6/8 folksy rhythms, but 4/4 is the unquestioned champion of popular (and specifically rock and roll) musical time signatures. Next time you hear a repeated phrase, notice that it very likely repeats 4 times, and then the change happens.

But a pentacoda is different. Here’s my best example. Rod Stewart had a classic hit with “Maggie May”, which came out on the Every Picture Tells a Story album. At the end of the song, the mandolin repeats a figure that basically introduced the song. It’s a nice effect, just the mandolin, and it really makes a great contrast to the story Rod has just tolds us about falling in love with an older woman. So the figure repeats 4 times… and then they tack on an extra repeat. The fifth one. And then the drums kick in, and the rest of the band, and Stewart sings, lamenting Maggie until it fades out.

It’s that extra repeat that really sticks out. After the fourth one, the listener is poised for the big finish, but then they play the extra one, the fifth. The pentacoda. Penta for five, coda for ending. In the way of contrast, another tune on that album, “Mandolin Wind” (Stewart must have been going through a mandolin phase), there’s another mandolin figure that gets repeated before Rod comes back singing. But this time it’s the normal, expected, four repeats.

Okay. It’s not a big thing. But it’s always struck me as special, as a little bonus, a musical twinge that, even though it doesn’t feel exactly “right”, nevertheless gets your attention.

Here’s another example, more arcane, but I’ll wager it’s definitely been noticed by a bunch of Deadheads in the world. On the Blues For Allah album (a masterpiece in every regard), the opening track is the infectious tune, “Help On the Way”, which has a long playoff (with a separate title: “Slipknot”), which, in that Grateful Dead “let’s keep segueing” way, then resolves into an all-time favorite on every Deadhead’s list, “Franklin’s Tower”. Near the end of this chain, just before dropping into Franklin’s, Jerry play this really catchy phrase, one he had introduced at the beginning of the segue. We hear four repeats, and then he tags it with a fifth, which then veers off into what become the opening chords of “Franklin’s Tower.” As a young Deadhead, it used to catch me everytime; now I wait for it, just to feel that little twinge.

I’m sure you can come up with other examples. But maybe not; trying to dredge up little musical moments is actually hard, especially as subtle as this is. But try to listen for it. It’s kinda neat when what almost seems like a mistake becomes a fixture, and even art.

Electors and Economics

Is the Electoral College a result of considerations about slavery by the Founding Fathers? I saw this idea posted on FB a few weeks ago. As I see it, there may have been an element of such a consideration in the establishment of the College (although the 3/5 clause, to the Founders’ shame, was certainly a more definite acknowledgement of slavery). I think the FB comment was in reference to the indirect nature of Presidential elections, and the factor of proportionality according to population combined with the “senator” count (ie, 2 per state in addition to the number representatives from that state). The senator component is likely what the commentor meant about a “slavery consideration.” As in the Congress, it gives extra power to states with less population; ie, (at the time) slave states.

But I’d like to think the Electoral College was much more a nod to Plato than anything else. Plato was absolutely opposed to “pure” democracy. The human tendency towards mob rule and “bread & circuses” was, and is, too obvious to ignore. I don’t actually favor the Electoral College, but I am not convinced that our species is sufficiently advanced, at least in this country, to avoid the siren lure of a demagogue, especially when the going gets rough. Beset by problems on all sides, too many people are eager to blame whomever the Demagogue Du Jour tries to blame: immigrants, the Left, the Press, etc. Note that our bicameral Congress (which also, at this moment in history, works against liberalism due to the slim chances of ever regaining the Senate) is equally a check against “tyranny by the majority”.

This begs the question of, if these institutions (the Electoral College and Congress) are not working to promote freedom and liberty, but instead seem slanted (at present) to promoting autocratic tendencies, what governmental forms would do a better job? It would be nice if a political Einstein appeared on the scene who could fabricate a new arrangement or form of government that did accommodate and tame both of these warring tendencies in human beings; ie, the desire for rational, responsive government vs. short-sighted temporary fulfillment. Or put another way, the requirement that every person’s opinion (and vote) carried equal weight vs. the power of an angry, misguided majority to inflict its will on minorities.

If such a political genius did appear, I suspect she would begin with a guaranteed (and required) proper public education, since it is our vast, collective ignorance that poses the most fundamental obstacle to enlightened self-governance. Certainly the most influential framer of them all, Thomas Jefferson, believed in the absolute necessity of an educated electorate. He said, “Educate and inform the whole mass of the people. They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.” An uninformed and ignorant population can always be easily swayed by someone willing to bend (or break) the truth in their favor.

And while I’m asking for a paradigm-changing genius to show up, I truly wish an economic genius could satisfy the warring forces in every human economy. On the one hand, unbridled capitalism requires an infinite capacity for growth; it only works over time if markets and profits expand without limit. But infinite growth on a finite planet that provides finite, limited resources, resources which are being contested for by 7 billion souls… that’s not possible. Marx’s “solution” was doomed to failure since it was predicated on behavior that is exactly the opposite of human behavior. No one is prepared to follow the idea of “from those of the greatest ability to those in the greatest need.” Humans are not wired that way, the altruism in our souls is not strong enough to overcome the greed, or even the need for self-preservation. Such an arrangement only leads to corruption whereby the bosses at the top of the Marxian ladder gather the profits that were supposed to have been shared.

But Adam Smith (and all his philosophical descendents) are also doomed in the face of the reality of finite limited growth. That calculus leads inevitably to runaway megawealth concentrated in the hands of a very small percentage of ultra-rich, the infamous 1%, while the middle class is squeezed out of existence. Basically the same outcome as Marxian economies.

And the most recent theorists (the ultra-capitalists, led by Koch, Friedman, Buchanan, etc) are now convinced that democracy itself is inimical to capitalism, or at least the way they envision capitalism. The concentration of the world’s wealth into the hands of an infinitesmally small segment of the population is not enough for them. They believe in a completely unbridled capitalism, with no government regulation whatsoever, neither in finance nor in environmental nor safety standards. And of course, that is what they are effectively now getting from the Trump administration, combined with equally unbridled corruption. These are people who fundamentally believe that an unlimited franchise to vote is a bad thing, because if EVERYBODY votes, they will naturally vote to provide for themselves, voting for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, public education, roads and bridges, all things that these ultra-capitalists believe should be gotten rid of. This, by the way, is the real force behind the recent upswing in voter suppression. The Koch brothers have been funding such efforts for decades.

And so we need TWO social geniuses to appear. The one, to tweak republican democracy so that it responds to the will of the people while ensuring that will does not run roughshod over those with less power and little voice. The other, to balance economy so that the billions of humans can work and improve themselves, while still operating within the constraints of dwindling global resources.

It probaby occurs to anyone thinking on the matter, that these two geniuses would be providing solutions to what is basically the same problem: how to elevate the human spirit so that it naturally seeks this balance. While simultaneously guarding against the predatory nature of powerful greed.

Not the New Normal

There is a worrisome hint of an idea that seems to be pervading the news and commentary since Michael Cohen delivered his public testimony last week. That testimony, as damning as it was to Trump and those closest to him, natually never moved the needle of public opinion, or, more specifically, the opinions of Trump supporters. They simply don’t care what Trump says or does, and they never will. They are the very definition of blind loyalists.

But it was not so much the testimony, or the reaction to it, that is worrisome. In the selfsame time frame, the meme that appeared was the suggestion that Mueller’s report was imminent. This was especially troublesome, coming as it did one week after Barr was sworn in as Attorney General. The timing was suspicious at best; it seemed unlikely that Mueller was coincidentally ready to wrap everything up. And especially in light of the flurry of legal activity surrounding Roger Stone. I am personally amazed that there seems to be no movement whatsoever toward indicting or accusing Don Jr., nor Jared, both of whom have been associated with flagrantly illegal activity. Nevertheless, Mueller’s subpoena pump seems to have run dry, with no indication that any more subpoenas are forthcoming.

This all seems to indeed point toward the strong possibility of an imminent Mueller report. Now, when we learn what’s in that report, I’m certain Democrats and progressives will feel vindicated in their expectancy: this horrible excuse for a President will not fare well in this report. There’s too much publically known that already shows that, and Mueller undoubtedly has much more to fill out the picture. But here is the worrisome hint of an idea that is making its presence felt: there will probably be no incontrovertible, obvious to everyone, clearly understood THING that anyone and everyone would immediately recognize as TRUMP IS GUILTY.

The Nixon tapes were straight-forwardly incriminating: there was Nixon’s voice, saying things that were illegal. But even then, the nature of those crimes were not clearly evident to the average Joe and Joan. To understand the legal ramifications, they had to see and hear the Congress and legal experts react, and that reaction informed them of the seriousness of the situation. There will be no such clear reaction to this report. Unless Mueller has evidence of a dead body somewhere, or videos of Trump doing dirty deeds, his followers will never admit that anything is wrong. And his GOP backers in Congress will never convict him. There will undoubtedly be undeniable grounds for impeachment in Mueller’s report. Hell, Trump provides undeniable grounds for impeachment on a daily basis. Clinton was impeached for a sex act in the Oval Office and a lie, and they impeached Andrew Johnson for how he addressed Congress. The litany of impeachable offenses committed by Donald Trump is too exhausting to even ennumerate.

And that is the most important point to be made. The sheer, overwhelming amount of damage Donald Trump has done to the Republic and to the office of the Presidency has exhausted us to the point of being (almost) comfortably numb. The 9000 lies, the kowtowing to Putin, the attacks on law enforcement, on the press, on the judiciary, on his enemies, on and on and on. It is so oeverwhelming that even the professionals in the media whose job it is sort all this out, even they cannot keep up with the constant barrage of outrageous corruption and criminality and indecency that floods us from this White House.

The greatest threat, in my opinion, is that we have been Robert McNamara’d into submission. (Those who do not recognize the phrase need to bone up on their Paul Simon). And by that, I mean that we are that close to accepting all this as “the new normal”. That having an immoral, vain, stupid, indecent, crass liar, criminal and cheating con man for our President is somehow “okay”, and what we should no longer feel shame and outrage for all his inhumane and selfish actions.

Because it’s just too tiresome to keep fighting. And because powerful men (and it is almost wholly men) in his party have completely abrogated their responsibility to the nation, and to the Constitution, and even to common decency in their decision to continue supporting and defending him.

Well, Donald Trump is NOT the new normal. And even a momentary lapse in rejecting him, his crudeness, his greed and his stupidity is a moment too long. We can never permit ourselves the luxury of fatigue, even in the face of this unrelenting onslaught of the nightmare he has unleashed on our nation. The stakes are too high, the risks are too great, the result of allowing Trumpian “politics” to be the new status quo are too horrific. Our children deserve better.

And so, stay alert. Stay informed. Stay outraged. Stay on track.

Growing up during the 60’s and 70’s, I never claimed to be, nor wanted to be, “normal.” I aimed for beyond normal, for Truth will a capital “T”, for enlightenment. That is still my goal. I will never accept an America defined by Donald Trump’s behavior as normal, new or otherwise.

The Internet Is A Harsh Mistress

One of my favorite science fiction books was (and is) Robert Heinlein’s The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress. In it, moon colonists revolt against an oppressive government on earth. The might of the entire Terran forces are arrayed against a relatively small group of hyper-independent “loonies”, so the revolt would seem doomed to failure.

Except for the fact that the all-encompassing computer network on the Moon has secretly become conscious. Self-aware. A fact known only by a lone computer technician named Mannie, who has become friends with “Mike” (the computer’s name). Together, they and a small cadre of people in on the secret, organize a revolution and bring Earth to its knees. Read it sometime, if you enjoy the genre. It’s classic Heinlein: great science fiction stirred in with a huge dose of libertarianism. Heinlein adores the no-nonsense independent underdog who never compromises and wins against overwhelming odds.

But the core of the story centers around Mike. Heinlein doesn’t spend a lot of time in explanation, but the seminal idea is that this giant computer network, spanning all the facilities and bases on the Moon, had, as a result of its mere vastness and complexity, become “conscious”. It’s an idea explored in a lot more detail in Douglas Hofstatder’s classic “Godel, Escher and Bach”. There’s a lot more that Hofstatder delves into, but the basic premise is something very much like “make the system large enough and complex enough, and self-awareness might just be triggered.”

Which brings me to my current suggestion: is it possible that the globe-spanning network of millions of computers, internets, connections and links, bots, viruses, etc, all mingled with countless nodes capable of advanced voice and symbol recognition, not to mention untold numbers of artificial intelligence efforts, all layered and interconnected to an unfathomable degree… is it possible that this global phusis has already triggered one (or more?) truly sentient entities? And by sentient, I mean like Mike: self-aware. Not merely knowledgeable, but purposeful.

The implications are both staggering and terrifying. And simultaneously heartening. One wonders how much harmful viruses might tip the resultant “personality” to the dark side. But then, are there also “white cell bots” out there as well? Is there a sruggle?

And if consciousness occurs once, wouldn’t it likely recur? Angels of light and darkness, toying with their new-found awareness, growing up, becoming fully realized.

And finally, are there any Mannie’s among us, secret friends to Mike? Or Mikes. Those with whom SIRI carries on lengthy conversations.

Well, if nothing else, it’s a helluva idea for a sci-fi yarn.

The New Doctor Who & Why I Care

For those who are unaware (see what I did there?), the long-running BBC science fiction show, Doctor Who, for the first time ever has a woman playing the role of the Doctor. Btw, if you really are unaware of the Doctor Who phenomenon, best to turn away now. This post will only make sense to whose familiar with the series.

There are many (myself included) who feel that the decision to cast a woman was long overdue. (And it’s worth noting that the decision to cast the Doctor as a person of color is still yet to be made.) This branching out was an important departure from the past, and has been generally met with positive regard. The new Doctor is portrayed by Jodie Whitaker, and she is well-suited to the role.

However, having a fine actress to play the role is not sufficient to guarantee a successful show.

I once again must report my dissatisfaction on the whole current season. These stories are just scattershot, no cohesion. They basically are just one continuous scene of a breathless Doctor pointing her sonic at everything, taking its temperature and then running around until the Bad Thing is defeated.

It is revealing that this year, for the first time in many moons, the producers decided not to have a special Christmas episode. Watching the Christmas show had become a family tradition in our house. But to do a Christmas show, the cast needs to have established a deep connection among themselves. Every past Christmas episode had a significant emotional impact, and that was only enabled by the emotional bonds that had grown among the Doctor and those around him. That hasn’t happened with this Doctor.

In short, I feel that the show has wasted a ginormous opportunity in giving us a female doctor. She deserves a better underlying vehicle.

Apparently the new showrunner decided that they will no longer employ a season long “story arc”, a common attribute of the “rebirthed” Doctor Who, i.e. post-2005. I don’t mind that as a goal so much as I mind what seems to me to be a lack of imagination in the individual stories. Season long story arcs are relatively new to Doctor Who. In the Golden Age, I believe they didn’t happen until the “Key of Time” season in the Tom Baker era (everyone’s fave Doctor until Tennant, who ushered in the “seasonal arc” motif). But the current stories seem, well, vapid might be too harsh. But definitely not fulfilling.

Having those transcendent arcs admittedly elevated the Doctor to a pan-Universal mythic godlike Hero whom Joseph Campbell would easily recognize. And yes, each successive elevation made it necessary to somehow reach even further the next time, and that’s demonstrably not sustainable: one can only save the entire Universe (and the Multiverse) so many times. When Capaldi spent BILLIONS of years inside his own Confession Dial in “Heaven Sent”, that was a masterful stroke of revelation as to the immensity of this being we call the Doctor. But given all that background, how can we be expected to simply revert to chasing ugly monsters with a sonic screwdriver? Are we to somehow simply erase this vast backstory?

And where are the familiar monsters of yore? I’ve still got 4 or 5 unwatched episodes (a situation that would NEVER have happened in seasons past), but there’s no hint of a Dalek or a Cyberman or any of the other “comfort food” enemies. Did they somehow just vanish from the universe?

Sigh. Perhaps the fan base will push back and these failings will be addressed. I certainly hope so. Against the terrors and horrors and political and cultural failures we are experiencing in the real world, I suppose it seems silly to be so upset about a fictional world. But there is a strong argument that heroic myths are the things that best sustain us in a turbulent and fearful existence. That is my belief.

Through the Trump Looking Glass

A Dark Benefit of the Trump Presidency

It’s become painfully obvious that Americans’ view of the world has split into two irreconcilable, non-intersecting and drastically different universes. On the one hand, there are a majority of Americans who reject this Presidency as the worst they’ve ever experienced or heard of. The size of that majority is calculated first by the 2016 popular vote, plus the large numbers who have been subsequently appalled by Trump’s continuous assault on democratic ideals, as well as the corruption, foreign policy blunders, hatefulness, and outright racism that has been the unrelenting hallmark of this administration.

Then there are the Trumpeters, that hard-core bastion of true-believers who support every action, every tweet, every insane pronouncement. There is literally nothing that Trump can do or say that blunts their blind allegiance. Their enthusiasm is as boundless as it is incomprehensible. Incomprehensible, that is, until one realizes that they are merely revealing the hatefulness, racism and fearful anger that has obviously been festering within them for a long time. The only difference is that now they feel emboldened to articulate (well, perhaps articulate is too strong a word) their deep dislike of everything different. Overwhelmingly white, and male-dominated, this core of seething hatred sees in Trump a kindred voice, who gives them targets to blame for an economy that has passed them by, leaving them frustrated and vengeful.

The election of Trump to the most powerful office in the world (at least it was when he was inaugurated; he has singlehandedly managed to siphon away huge swaths of that power, as well as losing respect around the world), that election has been seen by many, if not most, of us in the anti-Trump camp as an unmitigated disaster. We are all of us hoping things can hang together for what is likely to be 2 1/2 more years of cringe-worthy speeches and tweets, as well as attacks on the environment, voting rights and countless other democratic fronts. We hang on and work ceaselessly to remove this deadly cancer from the body politic.

But there is one unanticipated advantage the Trump phenomenon has presented us with. The Trump looking glass has made crystal clear the bigotries and terrible hatred in some of the people around you. People whom you may never have suspected of harboring such negative sympathies. People who have perhaps always seemed reasonable, intelligent, even educated, cultured and “aware” of injustice and bigotry, are now revealed as unreasonable in the extreme. They may possess intelligence, but have willfully chosen to avoid its use in discerning the atrocities they see being perpetrated on our society. Who may even take part in those atrocities. Those who are educated have chosen to ignore the lessons of history, both ancient and recent.

Just as the Romper Room lady could see so many in her Magic Mirror, the Trump Magic Mirror, when trained on the Trumpeters, reveals them for who they are: innately bigoted, racist, hate-filled and seeking vengeance for perceived wrongs. Enthusiastic partakers of white privilege whose fear of losing that privilege has driven them to this extreme.

The advantage in this? Simply that these people are in fact revealed in their true nature. It is incredibly important to recognize what people truly represent, what they truly wish for. Before the advent of Trump, we may never have known the baleful nature of their inner souls. Because there can be no mistake: for anyone to actively support this sociopathic, egotistical bully, this pathetic excuse for a human being, can only mean that such a supporter is equally mean-spirited, racist, xenophobic, close-minded and likely as unredeemable.

In short, they have revealed themselves as someone to ignore, someone to leave behind.

Look, it was understandable, in the election, and before Trump made it clear that he really was as despicable as he made himself out to be, it was at least comprehensible why some voters either just stayed away from the voting booth, or even voted for Trump. There was a huge animus against Hillary, not to mention that she ran one of the worst campaigns in memory. The strong support for Sanders was also a clear indicator of the swell of anitpathy to establishment politics. Trump rode that wave.

But whatever reasons made Trump a real possibility to moderates, and that galvanized his base (while simultaneously turning off Democratic support), the fact of the matter is that subsequent events have proven without a doubt that this blowhard clown is completely incapable of governing as POTUS. Further, it has become glaringly obvious that he is incapable of even pretending to act like a decent human being. He cruelly separated babies and young children from their parents, with no thought whatsoever as to how they might ever be reunited. He attempted to arbitrarily deny entry to Muslims, originally based solely on their religion. He continues to whittle away at the Affordable Care Act, putting thousands, maybe millions, out of reach of basic health care. He continues to erode safeguards against air and water pollution, and eliminating regulations that have kept toxins out of the environment. He is scrapping all efforts to reduce climate change, and in fact makes changes that will increase CO2 emissions. He cozies up to dictators and strong men, while simultaneously undermining decades old alliances with democratic allies.

If the Magic Mirror has stripped away the facade of decency among friends and relatives who still support Trump, even after a year and a half of non-stop outrageous behavior, then one has to ask oneself whether these friends and acquaintances are indeed people who deserve your friendship and allegiance. The short answer is, of course not. There has to be something deeply wrong in their psyche and soul to continue to support this insanity.

The hardest part is turning your back on long time relationships. But it is necessary to ask, on what basis were these relationships founded? If someone is adamantly a Trumpter, with no remorse, willing to accept his outright lies as truth, willing to spend not the slightest effort in seeing through his demagoguery, willing to vote for him again… then that person is terribly defective.

Once you’ve seen someone’s true nature revealed in the Trump Magic Mirror, isn’t it required that you deny that nature and turn your back? Perhaps they may one day regain some reasonable perspective on the world. But until then, they are only capable of negatively impacting the world.

But at least you know that now.