Good-bye to the Devil We Know....

I have never been a fan of the hyper-partisan, self-dealing* Mitch McConnell, but I have always been forced to admit to some grudging respect for his ability to accumulate and use power, to manipulate the system to the benefit of his party and (while it goes without saying but makes him no different than any of his colleagues in either party) himself.

However, I won’t start celebrating his long-goodbye announcement today any time soon, but not just because he will be replaced by someone a lot like him, albeit probably less effective in the short term. No, my fear is based on the ramifications of the power vacuum he is creating. 

The Berndt Power Theory postulates that political power in any environment is (essentially) constant and that the elimination or diminishment of any one power source will be replaced, perhaps by multiple persons, but replaced nonetheless. There will undoubtedly be some temporary disintegration of his power in the resulting friction between his colleagues to claim it as their own, but eventually equilibrium will be restored.

What worries me is the frightening and very real possibility that he will be replaced by a far worse devil, some nationalist MAGA toady that, combined with the possible reinstallation of Trump as president, would further undermine the already shaky foundations of democracy in the United States.

Senator McConnell, for all his partisanship, did serve as a check on the power of the nationalist MAGA wing, albeit such a gentle hand-check that even the most vigilant referee would be hard-pressed to call a foul. McConnell, at least, wanted power for the party which he believed was best suited to lead the country, was dedicated to the democratic traditions of the Senate (no matter how undemocratic they may often have seemed), believed in the rule of law, and practiced courtesy and decorum. I wish I were more confident that his replacement would have even a modicum of his level of honor and principles. But I have none.

*self-dealing ≠ corrupt by my definiton and applies to vitually every politician on the national stage. It’s what makes “politician” such a lucrative gig that its practioners will spend million$ to win a job that pays mere thousand$.

• I almost feel sorry for Mike Pence. Only almost, because he knew to whom he was, if not selling, at least renting his soul. Even if he didn’t, even if he was so naive and misguided to believe that he could ameliorate Trump’s toxicity, “Mother” knew and she didn’t keep her disdain a secret. Whether anyone else counseled him or not (aspirational minions are seldom the best source of wisdom), his wife tried to warn him, but ambition closed his eyes and ears to the obvious.
• Mike Pence is too much of a relgious zealot and idealogue on a quest for an American theocracy to ever get my vote. We could not be friends under any imaginable circumstances. The most the man who made one of the worst political and personal miscalculations in the history of American politics could hope for from me is the courtesy I would show almost any fellow human.
• There is, however, zero evidence that Mike Pence is anything but a good, decent man, unlike his former boss, for whom there is zero evidence that he is anything but a bad man. Vice-president Pence knew that but chose blind ambition over his beliefs to loyally serve “Despicable He.”
• His reward? Had there been a literal bus does anyone doubt the former president would have thrown him under it after being relegated to second place behind the Constitution? Mr. Pence is so vilified by his (ought to be former) party that he has already been forced to make room in that storage locker where he kept his principles for his doomed presidential campaign. Luckily, he had created some space by finding and displaying at least a modicum of integrity on January 6.
• And that’s why I (almost) feel sorry for him, in the same way I found sympathy for the Alec Guiness character who, at the end of Bridge Over the River Kwai, realized, to his horror, whom he had served.

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.

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.  

Reality Check: Believe the Numbers

A recent online exchange that questioned the number of votes won by President-elect Biden in the 2020 election inspires these counterpoints as to why I believe the numbers are essentially accurate. I have little hope of convincing those who are certain that THIS time Trump is telling the truth, but having spent 50+ years in education, tilting at windmills is hardly a new endeavor. I do not expect agreement on all these points. May I respectfully suggest, however, that rejecting ALL of them may say more about your political beliefs than election integrity. This is my reasoning. Even if only one or two resonate, that should be enough to make someone think.

I will limit my thoughts to bullet points, in honor of the departing incumbent. You’re welcome. Some of you know just how difficult that is for me! 

• I didn’t like the outcome, but I believed the vote in 2016. Trump didn’t win the popular vote that year, either. If you believed (or still believe) Trump’s 2016 fact-free claims about the popular vote, the verdict of no fraud verified by his own appointed investigative committee, then why are you wasting your time reading this?

• I walk. A lot. In my suburban, once reliably Republican neighborhood (of Webster Groves), Biden signs outnumbered Trump signs by at least 20:1, not counting “Any Functioning Adult,” “ByeDon,” “Anyone but Trump,” etc., nor all the independent BLM and similar signs, usually indicative not being in the Trump camp. No argument this a focused snapshot, but it does show, if not enthusiasm for Biden, at least the depth of antipathy toward the incumbent in my area. It is reasonable to assume there are many similar enclaves around the nation.

• In 2016 HRC ran the most abysmal, arrogant, entitled presidential campaign in modern history. She didn’t deserve to win. In 2020 Biden ran a better one. Why doesn’t that alone explain the increased votes?

• And Trump ran a worse one; he lost Arizona because he disrespected John McCain. An unforced error.

• Trump never reached out past his base, never offered an olive branch to expand his appeal. He kept hammering (tweeting?) the wedge, deepening the divide. His constant tweets were more unforced errors.

• Most voters, and thus most of the votes, live in cities/suburbs rather than rural/exurban areas. Trump’s unceasing attacks on cities – yet another unforced error.

• There is visual evidence of long lines of people in those urban areas, waiting to vote. That’s more evidence than exists for “truckloads/suitcases of fake ballots,” or “fraudulent voting machines,” or….

• Trump is a whiny, immoral, unlikeable bully. We want to like our president. No one likes a bully. It should come as no surprise that the disaffected voted in greater numbers.

• Many of his supporters, maybe even you, recognize that he is a lightning rod, a deliberately polarizing figure. Why would that not inspire more people than ever to vote? But Trump does get credit for inspiring a record turnout in both his supporters and opponents.

• Don’t the unprecedented public Biden endorsements, defections, and attacks by prominent Republicans and office holders provide a clear enough signal of Trump’s lack of support, even within his own party?

• Trump doesn’t beat just one dead horse, he has a whole stable of them. They’re still dead, though.

• Trump’s approval ratings* have been underwater since he took office. Your approval of him does not change those numbers. Is it so inconceivable that such unpopularity translates into votes for his opponent? (*I actually tracked them for several months because they gave me hope. I have the chart if you’re interested.)

• Of course there can be small scale conspiracies. But large scale conspiracies, like those Trump and his enablers describe, have too many moving parts, require too many secrets, too many people, to succeed without being exposed and collapsing. Unrealistic and absurd. 

• But if it really were possible to cheat on that large a scale, why did the Democrat Party not bother to win at least one of the toss-up Senate races? (Personally, I’d have rather won 4 of those than the presidency, as much as a second Trump term would have made me cringe.)

• Trump’s fraud claims have been rejected across the board, across the aisle, and across the country. Trump appointed judges, Republican office holders, Republican appointees, all have refuted the fraud claims. And now the Trump dominated SCOTUS, at least twice.

• Claiming the other “team” cheated before you even play may make you feel better about losing but doesn’t change the score. And if you truly believe you’re going to win, do you claim cheating in advance?

• Even many of his supporters and 2016 voters recognize his multitude of character flaws. Just because that wasn’t enough to sway them (or you) in 2020 doesn’t mean it wasn’t enough to sway others.

• I don’t know how many supporters he lost by disrespecting them (e.g., “I could shoot someone on 5th Avenue....”) but it seems logical to assume that at least some moved out of the neighborhood (5th Avenue).

• Had Trump even once taken personal responsibility (for anything, ever), admitted he made a mistake (about anything) or was wrong (about anything), he’d be planning his (unmasked) inaugural balls.

• Both parties are represented with poll watchers. There is STILL no objective, verifiable evidence of fraud. That is not to say no “bad” votes were cast, but in terms of risk/reward, the penalty for manipulating even a couple hundred votes (again, no evidence that happened) far outweighs what a cheater might hope to accomplish. Even the close votes were not THAT close.

 • He’s been lying since inauguration, with easily verifiable photographic (e.g, inauguration), audio (denying saying things that were recorded), and first person accounts. He may be a blatant and prolific liar, but he’s bad at it. You’d think all that practice would have helped, but no.

• Oh, and I never believed he colluded with the Russians in 2016. Granted, it’s mostly because he lacks the character traits (discretion, patience, intelligence) and skills needed to collude, but still….

Trump Disconnect Syndrome (TDS II)

    Please apply the #StinkTest. Please. Had the election outcome been different and Joe Biden was mimicking President Trump’s words and actions and his campaign was waging the same kind of war against democracy, what would be your reaction? It is inconceivable to me that ANYONE, no matter how partisan and committed, could buy into his absurdity, his ludicrous opinion that EVERYONE except his supporters is out to get him (including multiple Republicans and, wait for it, Fox News). You don't even have to try to put the shoe on the other foot -- just look at it and you have to see it doesn’t fit. It is beyond irrational. The possibility of a conspiracy that vast, involving as many people as would be required, and with no credible evidence, is absurd. That Kool-Aid would have to be laced with LSD. Speaking of acronyms....

    I previously offered my thoughts on TDS (Trump Defense Syndrome), the projection by Trump supporters that any criticism of the president is also a personal attack on them. His followers continue to be triggered by ANYTHING that remotely smacks of criticism, so nothing has changed, nor, I expect, will change. A little while back I posted an admittedly snarky shot at the president post-election. It was intended as humor, pointed humor to be sure, but it hardly rose (descended?) to the level of comments and tweets from the president himself during the last four years. His defenders complained that it (among other things I wrote) treated him unfairly. Hello, #StinkTest. Although I have no hope of changing even a single mind, and have been letting this piece percolate for a few weeks for that very reason, it is exactly this kind of triggering that has motivated me to revisit the issue of TDS. 

I have no doubt I will regret broaching this topic, but you’ll have to accept me at my word that it comes from a place of genuine curiosity and a desire to try to understand. Is it a forlorn hope that it’s a two-way street? (Sigh) Probably.

I truly cannot understand the disconnect that I see between defending the president, seemingly no matter what, while completely ignoring the UNPRECEDENTED criticism that has come, and continues to come, from those who have worked closely with him, men (there may be women, I’m just not aware of any) who were part of “the best people,” who chose to serve, if not him, at least their country in his administration. These men are not anonymous sources, but high profile persons of estimable character (okay, not Steve Bannon), generally respected across the aisle. That doesn’t even count former Republican presidents, self-identified conservative and libertarian columnists, the true-believer Republicans who founded The Lincoln Project, or less well-known members of his administration. It is astounding how many prominent Republicans endorsed his opponent. Has that EVER happened before, and why now? Nor does it count John (Buy my book) Bolton. Nor Colonel Vindman, nor…. Well, you get the picture, although that picture ought to include that their competition is Rudy Giuliani. Seriously?

Speaking of pictures, I’m including a meme (no, my negative opinion of memes has not abated) only because it presents some actual quotes all in one handy visual. 

How can Trump defenders explain the withering criticism (This from Gen. Jim Mattis is just one example) from so many of his inner circle? How can they continue to defend him when so many who worked closely with him in his administration have little, if anything, good to say about him? 

I’m sorry, but it is just not credible to think it’s ALL fake news, that EVERYBODY is wrong except him, that EVERYBODY is lying EXCEPT him, that EVERY critic is a hater or “Never-Trumper,” even if he appointed them, that ALL these people, respected people, unquestionably patriotic people, are out to get him. And even if so, why? I am therefore adding Trump Disconnect Syndrome (TDS II) to the original Trump Defense Syndrome (TDS).

I am genuinely curious how this happens. I promise not to argue answers, although I will call out deflections that don’t answer the question. I may (respectfully) ask a follow up or provide an anecdote, because that’s just who I am, but, again, I don’t expect any mind changing to emanate from this exercise. And if “Biden is worse” is all you’ve got, well, okay, then let’s not waste each other’s time, because not only does it fail to answer the question, but, as I’ve said on numerous occasions, IMO no one could possibly be worse than Despicable He: A.Bad.Man.

Oh, and add the recently fired Mike Esper to the list: “God helps us.”

Another Plague – TDS – Trump Defense Syndrome

This was written a few weeks ago, long before former Secretary of Defense James Mattis offered his rebuke (Click for Link)

Although I’ve been called a “hater,” I do not “hate” Donald Trump. I certainly do not hate those who still support him. Yes, I have no respect him for him, certainly not as a person, but also not as a leader. He must however, be given credit for effectively stoking anger, fear and division. 

Hatred, however, would require more of my energy than he deserves or time than I have for someone of his ilk. So, no, I do not hate him; that’s my choice, albeit one that requires constant mindfulness.

Of course, that will not satisfy those who suffer from Trump Defense Syndrome, TDS. Never mind that many of those same people “hated” Obama (personally) for their own reasons which need not be addressed here. 

The difference, however, is that those of us who felt many of the attacks on President Obama were unfair or unwarranted, did not take those calumnies personally. Just because some believed him to be a bicycle-helmet wearing Kenyan-born Muslim socialist/communist in a tan suit did not get interpreted as a personal attack on those of us who either supported him or did not find him nearly as threatening or abhorrent as Fox News and fake memes wanted us to believe.

But what I’ve noticed, for the many suffering from TDS, is that ANY fault-finding of the president, no matter how rational or justified or even trivial, is taken as a personal affront, a personal attack on them and their values, and is responded to in like manner. That parallels the reaction of the president himself, of course. Any stricture, even any question that he interprets as negative is viewed as a personal attack, because EVERYTHING is about HIM.

I won’t deny that some of those “attacks” on him are personal (although often, IMO, well deserved), but many, if not most, others are just questions that he seems incapable of answering in any objective manner or opposition to his ideas based on political or philosophical differences. His midnight tweets evidence how personally he takes ANY criticism. I find it ironic that a person who revels in personal attacks on his opponents is so thin-skinned when the mirror reflects in his direction. But isn’t that the way bullies typically operate? And yes, that is a personal attack on a despicable being, but not on you. But if you think this is personal, you may be, whether you recognize it or not, infected with TDS.

Random Thoughts: Senator Bernie Sanders & Various Other Political Stuff

• I have many friends and family who supported Senator Bernie Sanders. I respect the choice, process, beliefs, and values of these good, honest, hard-working, patriotic Americans whose reactions, right now, seem to range from denial to disappointment to despondency and despair, with End of the World (REM) as background music. Senator Sanders may have been at the bottom of my list, but I don't know of any followers supporting him out of a desire for “free stuff” for themselves. None. Zero. Not One. That’s an insulting fake news slander.

• 4 years ago, teaching American Gov’t and Politics at Lindbergh, I told my kids that Senator Sanders’ legacy would be the detoxification of the word “Socialist” for the next generations of young voters. I didn’t anticipate he’d try again, because I thought his window had closed. Turned out it had.

• However, had I known HRC would run such an abysmal, yet arrogant/entitled campaign (the arrogant/entitled parts were no surprise), I might have actually voted for Senator Sanders in the 2016 primary. Despite what some believe, I claim neither party, so I sat it out. Any palatable Republicans had been eliminated by the time of Missouri’s primary. (Bonus points – name the one I could have easily supported.) Two populists would have at least been interesting. 

• Full Disclosure: I would vote for the dish sponge we forgot to rinse out before leaving on our last trip before I’d even consider casting a ballot for the current occupant of the White House; at least the sponge could be cleaned up and made useful. And whether cleaned up or discarded, the dish sponge wouldn’t be dangerous – and maybe smarter. 

• By the time Missouri’s primary rolled around this year, all of my favored (Democrat) options had also been eliminated. So, given my choices, I went with Biden, because while a President Sanders doesn’t particularly frighten me, Candidate Sanders is, in my view, more worrisome. But who knows, maybe the Democrat Party would also turn out to be cowardly sycophants* were he to win (although I obviously didn’t like his chances of defeating President Trump; neither did Putin and the Russians, apparently).

• Why should it come as any kind of surprise that Democrat-identifying voters would want a nominee who is, you know, a bona fide Democrat and party member? 

• Didn’t Senator Sanders have four years to actually join the Democrat Party if he wanted to be its standard bearer? I respect that he was standing up for principles, but you can’t reasonably object to the cost of doing so. It’s like committing an act of civil disobedience and then complaining when you get arrested because you’re on the side of the angels. 

• Sanders supporters also might want to consider that, just because they are passionate about their candidate, maybe, just maybe, he didn’t get cheated as much as failed to stir those same feelings in enough of the voters who chose to participate in the Democrat Party nomination process. To imply otherwise is kind of insulting.

• Joe Biden is going to be the nominee of the Democrat Party. Respected non-partisan pollster Nate Silver of 538 puts his odds at >99%, followed by None and Sen. Sanders, in that order. Voters will, essentially, need to choose between Joe Biden and Donald Trump. Sanders supporters will not be the first, nor, sadly, the last, to have to hold their noses when they vote. Sitting out, writing in, protesting or choosing a third party are votes for the incumbent. If it’s a matter of principle, do what you must. Just remember, as Senator Sanders himself learned, those principled actions have consequences. Well, not in Missouri, because your vote, if it’s like mine, doesn’t really count. I’ll cast it anyway, though.

Other political observations, not always new

• True believers and ideologues make me nervous. Having spent more than a few years as a true-believer, I understand better than most how those kinds of blinders work. I like to think I was more pragmatic than most true-believers, but I also recognize that not everyone would agree. (However, as evidence, I offer one of my favorite smh compliments from a dear friend: “You’re the sanest gadfly I’ve ever known.”)

• Trump supporters who want attack perceived character flaws in Joe Biden might want to remember they live in glass houses – stained glass, not plexiglass. They forfeited that argument four years ago and I’ve seen no improvement since, except that his adulterous and lecherous proclivities have probably been more restricted lately.

• I wonder how many people who claim to be embarrassed by Trump, or excuse themselves with “I don’t like him but…” bothered to cast a protest vote for one of the other candidates in the Republican primary? (about 5% apparently) It’s not like his nomination is in doubt. Some state Republican parties even cancelled their primaries altogether. A free chance to make a statement. I no longer get his so-called surveys, so my “spitting in the wind” response days are over.

• Do partisan political memes make ANYONE feel better, besides you, maybe? Are they helpful in a time when we need to be pulling together? Do they provide real information? Can you recognize a rhetorical question?

• Finally, political parties do not exist to help people. They do not exist to help you; they do not exist to help me. That is a truth that crosses party lines, both Republican and Democrat. Their prime directive is the accumulation and consolidation of their own power. If the last four years haven’t amply demonstrated that, you’ve been distracted by the unfortunately unscripted reality show playing daily. Any benefit that comes to people, including their individual members, is merely a happy coincidence.

* The Republican Party kowtowing (oooh, irony) to seemingly every Trump whim and whine makes me wonder if the spelling should be changed to “psychophant.”

A Facebook Caveat Emptor -- True Story

A friend of mine supports Senator Sanders. Actually, more than one, but one in particular inspires this cautionary tale. (Because it’s irrelevant I’m going to obscure the friend’s gender by using the {newly accepted} “they” as I relate this to you.)

On their feed was posted a(n alleged) link to a Washington Examiner story claiming polls showed that only Bernie Sanders could defeat President Trump. My simple response, “You know the Examiner is a right wing source, yes?” In other words, like their hero, President Trump, the Examiner would prefer to have Senator Sanders as the opposition, and their polling source might have its own agenda. However, I don’t even know if the link was bona fide because I didn’t open it.

My friend responded later with a text, with these exact words: “Don’t know where that article came from, I don’t remember sharing it. Thanks for pointing it out!!!” Wow! You can’t even trust Facebook! (sarcasm, btw)

Those of you who actually vet or fact check your sources (and don’t just share memes and links that fit your world view) probably don’t need this warning, even if you are horrified by the anecdote, but be skeptical of EVERYTHING on Facebook. The poster may not even know what’s being published under their name – especially if it’s shared content from a third party, or a meme, or a link to or from a biased source.  Not only may it be untrue, it may not even come from the person who seemingly posted it. That there are bad actors out there spreading misinformation cannot be denied.

Random notes & observations inspired by the above:

• I don’t know a single Sanders supporter who wants free stuff. Not.a.single.one.

• Political parties care about one thing, and one thing only: power for the political party. Neither (none) holds the keys to either heaven or prosperity.

• While there was no perfect candidate, none of my top 3-4 choices on the Democrat side were probably ever really viable candidates, but….

• I would vote for the dish sponge we forgot to rinse out prior to our trip before the incumbent president, because with some effort, the dish sponge could be cleaned up, salvaged and made useful.

• It’s honestly difficult for this ex-English teacher to do the “they” thing, but I understand the rationale.

• Speaking of ex-English teachers, I know one who tried to teach his students that the adverb “very” was the product of a weak vocabulary or a lazy mind, and exemplified poor writing. Oh, wait, that was me (probably among others).

• Speaking of lazy, political memes are for those too lazy to express their own thoughts and ideas. Memes are, by definition, simplistic and misleading. Just.Stop.

The Why Not The What

The why is more important than the what, motivation > outcome, process > result. When teaching history, what happened interested me far less than the why and how; in English, reasoning always eclipsed the actual conclusion.

As the tribes dig their trenches ever deeper and their siege mentality fossilizes, I struggle mightily, with ever increasing fatigue, to listen to, if not agree with, those who see politics (and society) as what more and more seems to resemble a war. I get that people view life through different lenses. So I don’t really care what people think nearly as much as I care why they think as they do.

I know good people who voted for the current president; I respect, even I don’t completely understand, their reasons. That I could never have come to that same conclusion does not negate their process or value as fellow inhabitants on this planet. I have been clear from long before the election that I had no respect for Donald Trump as a person, that I found him a despicable being, based on his own words and actions, not on what others said about him. 

I do have to give him credit for subsequently pushing his stock lower than even I could have imagined during his tenure; he has revealed himself to be an even worse being than I could have possibly anticipated. Understand, I’m talking personal traits (the word qualities seems so inappropriate), not political positions. Again, based on his own words and actions, not the opinions of others. 

Still, I get that at least many, if not most, of his supporters don’t think character matters; as long as that remains a consistent metric for future candidates with opposing POVs, I won’t argue. Some are so invested in the Republican Party (which is no longer resembles anything like the party of Eisenhower or Reagan or even Bush (43), but never mind) that their support is unwavering. Others are so anti-Democrat, frightened or disgusted by their vision of that party, that nothing else matters. Okay, I get that, too. I may view those positions as mistaken or wrong, but valid at least through their own lenses. The why, not the what.

Believe me, it takes a lot of effort for me to ignore everything to arrive at that point, but I can generally, grudgingly, manage. For so many people committed to their tribe, whichever tribe it is, it’s a black and white world.

But what truly frustrates me is that as hard as I work to give/find credit, to respect those who hold opposing views, to understand the why if not the what, I find little evidence that there is any attempt to understand MY why. Instead, I see memes and snarky reposts that too frequently border on personal (if not specifically addressed to me) attacks. For those defending the current president, if I can try to understand the why of your position, is reciprocity, the respect for one who disagrees with you, too much to ask? 

That is what is wearing me out and down. That is what makes me want to completely disengage. But my gift this holiday season is to persist. If you would like to reciprocate, may I suggest resisting the temptation to share that meme or post which demonizes, denigrates, or discounts those who don’t see the world through your lens, but their own, a lens they value. Think about their why.

No matter the tribe to which you pledge allegiance, mindlessly posting memes about the other just expands and mines a “No Man’s Land,” shredding the fabric of our nation, building a wall that keeps our country apart — and weak. 

July 4 and The Importance of History

I have neither the intellectual rigor nor academic credentials to claim the label “historian,” or really even “history buff.” Still, I do know stuff, a lot of it history from teaching and preparing to teach various courses. Maybe I can claim “history dilettante,” which kind of fits my approach to so many things.

Nevertheless, on the 4^th of July, I am disturbed by the number of people willing to ignore history, the number of people willing pretend history doesn’t matter, the number of people willing to twist history to fit their world view and agenda.

This holiday in particular seems to inspire people.

Conservatives proudly wave their flags and tout their beliefs, failing to recognize that the history of conservatism is the story of people swimming against the tide. In their time, conservatives opposed declaring independence and the American Revolution (Tories), ratifying the Constitution (anti-Federalists), abolition, passage and enforcement of the Civil War Amendments, women suffrage, organizational rights for workers, social security, social integration and Brown v. Board, the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts, civil rights protections for all people…. Change is scary and conservatives play an important role in making people slow down before adopting ill-conceived (even if usually well-intentioned) proposals without considering the inviolable Law of Unintended Consequences. But conservatives have consistently been on the wrong side of history. You can’t truly own your political philosophy without also owning its historical roots.

When you don’t know your history, you adopt slogans like “America First” without knowing its provenance. The slogan was used by the Ku Klux Klan in marches as early as the 1920s and as late as David Duke in 2016.

It was also used as an argument by Woodrow Wilson to keep us out of World War I and opponents of the League of Nations after that war. It was resurrected by Nazi sympathizers, anti-Semites, and isolationists, including Charles Lindbergh, during the 1930s to try to keep us out of World War II, or from even helping our (eventual) allies, and the short-lived AFC (America First Committee), formed in opposition to FDR in 1940, but disbanded for obvious reasons after Pearl Harbor. Pat Buchanan (who notoriously called WW II “an unnecessary war”) used it in his run for office in 2000 on the Reform Party ticket. Do you know who also tried to get the Reform Party nomination in 2000? Donald Trump (who called Buchanan a “Nazi-lover”). Although his campaign style may be consistent, apparently he forgot the origins of his now favorite slogan.

   And then there’s the just plain “bad” history. Although I reject that the Civil War, at its core, was about anything other than preserving and expanding slavery, I recognize the deep roots of the “lost cause” school. I also “know” that its goal was to transform sedition into nobility, but understand why others might reject that view. Today, however, someone said slavery was incidental and the true cause was taxes. Fortunately for my self-esteem, I do not know and did not teach this person; and my goal here is not to create a lesson on the cause(s) of the Civil War. I’ll just end with what I was tempted to say, the variously (and apparently often incorrectly) attributed quote, “It is better to remain silent at the risk of being thought a fool than to talk and remove all doubt of it.” I obviously do not always heed my own advice. 

Happy July 4, 2018.