Out of the Closet

For the last 5-10 years overt antipathy and bigotry toward members of the LGTBQ+ community had seemed to be steadily declining. To be sure, no one believed that it (like racism) has ceased to exist, but it became unacceptable in polite society to advertise such attitudes, and those who held such views found themselves, ironically, in the closet, so to speak.

Just as President Trump’s wink and nod to the neo-Nazis and white nationalists encouraged racists to crawl from their ratholes, so has Governor DeSantis’s plan to base his campaign on gay-bashing (to wit, the recent ad* from his campaign that essentially says, “No one hates the LGBTQ+ community more than me, especially that enabler Trump.”) encouraged his Ameristani acolytes, like the Taliban after the U.S withdrawal from Afghanistan, to come forth from their dark caves and reveal themselves. Not only are they openly and proudly proclaiming their bigotry, they’re advertising and reveling in it. I take no solace that the recent sign-burning in our purple dot of a community was done under the cover of darkness.

I’m a big fan of unintentional irony (and karma), so I’m not sure what to think about some right wing groups making Chick-fil-A a boycott target for having dared to create an EDI (Equity, Diversity & Inclusion) Office and then even hiring someone to lead it. DeSatan is trying to make such EDI programs illegal in what he hopes will become Floridistan. So much for “local control” and “free” enterprise.

Many people, me included, are bemoaning divisiveness in the United States. I’d like to be optimistic, hopeful that this is just part of the pendulum cycle. Instead, I’m afraid. Populist politicians encourage the rift because it suits their power-hungry purposes, but if someone you love is a member of the LGTBQ+ community, this is a fearful time. As the t-shirt slogan proclaims, “Be careful who you hate. It may be someone you love.”

*Finding the actual ad link is beyond my skill set, but just click HERE and you'll get the picture.

Wednesday Wonk

I ADMIT to being a bit of a political wonk (unless it requires truly extensive research, because I also admit that I’m not that energetic about providing enlightenment for free). So when the following crossed my “desk” this morning, it triggered a memory.

NOT that I get a lot of MAGA traffic here, but while this is critical of Trump’s tenure as President, it’s policy, not personally, focused. (There’s plenty of the latter out there, and if you’re not already convinced, nothing I or anyone else can say will move you off 5^th Avenue.) Just a tidbit to file away, if you want.

THE move to make LEDs the primary form of lighting in homes and businesses is shaping up to be huge when it comes to energy efficiency. In 2005, a typical commercial building spent 40 percent of its electricity just lighting the place; today it’s 6-8 percent. An incandescent bulb gets 17 lumens of light per watt, while your typical equivalent LED is looking at 70 lumens per watt.… Lighting accounts for 15 percent of global power consumption.... Switching to more efficient lighting not only reduces the costs of light, but also makes it more available worldwide without damaging the atmosphere. (Source: Vox via Numlock)

TRUMP made a lot of noise (because that was his primary focus and outcome across the board) about his battle to undo federal rules (started under George W. Bush in 2007, btw, but accelerated under Obama) on light bulbs. In late December, 2019, the Trump administration announced it would block a rule designed to phase out older incandescent bulbs and require Americans to use energy-efficient light bulbs. 

REFLEXIVE opposition to anything progressive (or somehow connected to the Obama administration) was not only a hallmark of the Trump administration, but also now of the Republican Party, regardless of what positive effects those policies, rules,or attitudes might have. Never mind that LEDs help save both money and the environment. Not that there's a problem with climate change, of course, but $$$....

Doubling Down on Denial

You might think, with good reason, that this is about our politicians (I cannot in good conscience call them political leaders), who seem to think that if you repeat the same denials and falsehoods with increasing frequency and at higher decibel levels, eventually the actual facts will fade away. Sadly, this too often seems to be working, just as it did with Adolf Hitler.
But not so, because this “strategy,” if you will, is not their exclusive province. Strategy might imply more deliberation than is true in most cases, but we’ll just stick with that word. 
We humans have a proclivity to try to shape the world to our desires. Reality be damned, facts be damned, history be damed, science be damned, we’re damn well going to believe what we want to fit the narrative of a world like we want it to be. 
It is why we keep giving those who let us down, or even abuse us, innumerable chances. How many undeserved “last chances” have some of us given addicts, abusers, or offspring? How many times do we base our decisions on hope, not performance. “Wait ’til next year” is not just a sports cliché.
Whether those “last chances” are based on love, fear, or hope doesn’t change the delusion that motivates our decisions and enables their behavior. Sadly, the beneficiaries of our denial probably aren’t any more “telling the truth this time” than they were the last time, even if both they – and we – want that to reflect reality.