Category Archives: CounterCurrent

The Stupid in All of Us

3 Replies

I’ve been struggling to find the words to accurately and succinctly describe MAGA followers in the US with their silly contrarianism and shallow theories of patriotism. I do this because there is something truly peculiar about the shape of conservatism today. I’ve been avoiding the word “stupid” because I didn’t want to hurl the accusation towards people with genuine cognitive disabilities. After all, intelligence is a multilegged attribute that encompasses too many diverse abilities with a single word. But of late I’ve decided that the word is fine to use if you don’t associate it with cognitively disabled people. Online you can find a definition defining it as “behavior or actions that show a lack of good sense or good judgement.” If it isn’t a clean detachment from the cognitively disabled, then at least it is only a superficial scratch.

Ex-president #45 took a sharp swerve from the “norms” of American politics and examples are too numerous to list here. His angry movement didn’t fall out of thin air. In the 2016 election he attracted followers by his audacity and with the propaganda engines of Twitter, conservative radio and television news. They were already out there primed by the nascent Tea Party, but along comes #45 giving them a charismatic and bellicose populist leader with a knack for getting on the news. His rhetorical skills are unmatched and he knows instinctively how to attract and excite a crowd. Importantly, he is a master of social media muckraking. He is not in the least inhibited by social norms for civil discourse.

The big hammer that American conservatism wields is the view of the “good us vs the bad them.” Somehow, the “bad them” always involves liberalism. “Them” can be the flavor of the day- immigrants, abortion, Muslims, NATO etc. This is guaranteed to frighten a certain fraction of the electorate. Throw in the eschatology of conservative Christians claiming that American politics will lead to or accelerate the end times and you have potent brew of dread fear.

Just to be clear, in US history there have never been long stretches of time when citizens frolicked innocently in green pastures of civility and peace was upon the land. There has always been turmoil and hardship somewhere for someone. We’ve always had murderers and thieves preying on the innocent and unwary. Yet the US experiment with democracy and capitalism overall has thrived, dipped and recovered over time. Somehow, Americans have avoided fascism. Until now.

There have always been exceptional people in the world who were able to rally groups for an epic cause, whether it was for military, political or religious purposes. It is the story of history. Today is no different, although the means and speed of persuasive communication has advanced considerably. After the invention of the printing press, there was opposition by religious leaders claiming that easy and rapid availability of information or propaganda would destabilize their personal view of how the social order should be. Since then, ideas of all sorts have found their way into the minds of the masses at increasing speed to this very day. Today, populist rhetoric and opinion can travel internationally at speeds limited only by the clock speed of computers and the speed of light.

There has always been a fraction of any population that gets agitated or frightens easily. Fright can come from direct experience or persuasion. Anything that threatens perceived safety, stability or income will unnerve people to some extent and some much more than others. It is called economic disenfranchisement and it is widespread in the US. Money equals power and lacking it means that one is not invited to the party.

The feeling of being cheated also agitates people. And this is where #45 excels. Unfortunately, in the US there is a large group of people that have not been able to fully enjoy the fruits of our civilization. For many reasons they have been passed over in terms of opportunities to advance or just keep up with the times.

One effect of technological advance is the obsolescence of labor-intensive jobs. Labor costs are always a target for innovators and businesspeople in the eternal march towards greater efficiency. This has been happening since the invention of the wheel. Any given task can be the target of cost reduction by lowering of the headcount. It may seem coldhearted but, in society, it is as ever-present as gravity.

People who lack valuable skill sets or those made obsolete by technology or corporate maneuvering are at a serious disadvantage in American society. People who chose life paths that did not include educational enrichment such a trade school or college have long been at a disadvantage. A comfortable retirement after a lifetime of low wages is difficult or impossible. Some people manage to excel but most don’t. Some start businesses that take off. Most don’t because they don’t know how or lack startup capital. The market can only sustain so many nail salons or restaurants in a given location.

Indicted ex-president #45 discovered his knack for anger politics at some point and jumped on it at a time when conservative electronic media was blossoming. He couldn’t help himself. His authoritarian impulse found a venue in politics and wide acceptance.

The acceptance of authoritarian leadership is particularly stupid for a citizen in a democracy. Our democracy is extremely unusual in human history. Many of us fail to appreciate that.

All of us exhibit stupidity now and then. We all commit “behavior or actions that show a lack of good sense or good judgement.” I do, that much is certain. We live in a time when a great many fellow citizens assent to a movement that, in the end, is not to their best interests. Not all stupid behaviors are equal in magnitude or in the kind of harm produced. It seems to me that gladly accepting authoritarian leadership in anger is especially stupid. Democracy once forfeited is not easily retrieved.

Trading away many of the benefits of democracy for some perceived guarantee of social order is a prelude to dictatorial government. Democracy is inherently chaotic to some extent. This is at the core of the American experiment. In exchange a notch of social order we trade some measure of freedom and liberty. Voting for authoritarian governance is the final act of a democracy.

Post Card From Ukraine

Leave a reply

Warning: Political content below.

I received a post card from Ukraine the other day because of a donation I made. It shows an event they are very proud of- the first attack on the Kerch bridge. I’m sure some Ukrainians feel abandoned by NATO’s refusal to let them join, but there is good reason behind NATO’s answer. Russia’s long-standing morbidly paranoid obsession with NATO and the “morally corrupt” West would only be validated by such a move. It would be destabilizing today and would definitely bring us closer to nuclear conflict. To do so today would immediately step NATO into direct conflict with Russia. Ok. Enough from Captain Obvious.

Source: A post card from Ukraine.

After the Russian revolution of 1918, the Bolsheviks tried to capture and Russify the Ukrainian territory. After several attempts in 1918-1922 they relented and Lenin finally consented to give them independence as a state within the Soviet Union. This was not because Lenin was interested in building a Ukrainian state, but rather it was a desperate move to mollify the Ukrainians while allowing the Bolsheviks to keep control over the territory. Lenin did not set out to create Ukraine.

During the early 1930’s, Stalin’s government was busy collectivizing the agricultural lands of the USSR. Collectivizing Ukrainian farmland meant getting peasants, especially those with greater than 8 acres of land (Kulaks) to turn over their land to the collective. This proved to be so messy that eventually Stalin closed off Ukraine and required internal passports. Thus began a 2-year famine leading to mass starvation. Ukrainian crops and animals were systematically removed by the Soviets in what were sometimes called “red trains.” During this time several million Ukrainians were starved to death, executed or imprisoned in a distant labor camp. This period covering 1932 to 1933 is called the Holodomor, or The Great Famine. You can read all about it on the interwebs.

As directed by Putin, Russia is presently attempting to extinguish Ukrainian culture again. The kidnapping of children and shipping them to be raised in Russian homes as well as other forms of Russification in the occupied territories of Ukraine are underway. For the Ukrainians, the Russian invaders are like the Borg from Star Trek in their needy desire to absorb them into their domain- “Resistance is futile.”

It should be remembered that the Ukrainian experience with Russia has been very bad for a long time.

Authoritarianism isn’t just a problem in some eastern European states. Seeds of it are being spread here in the US by a new brand of neoliberal GOP leaders. Many times they have the words “liberty” or “freedom” in the organizations names. This is a disingenuous and underhanded rhetorical maneuver in the same way that countries that use “Democratic” or “People’s Republic” in their names. Using the words “liberty” or “freedom” implies the sacred and wholesome attributes of Patriotism, motherhood and apple pie. Their utopian vision necessarily leads to the demolition of our present liberal democratic society. Neoliberalism is the road to oligarchy.

“Neoliberalism advocates a deregulated, capitalist, globalist market economy, reifies individual greed, and markets a watered-down version of Austrian economics to left-liberals. This ideology manifests as a hybrid between right-and-left liberalism, where the social ideals of left-liberals (particularly, social equality) is attacked via economics and a worldview which views people as only making choices for themselves.”

Source: Rationalwiki.org.

“Liberal democracy is the combination of a liberal political philosophy that operates under a representative democratic form of government. It is characterized by elections between multiple distinct political parties, a separation of powers into different branches of government, the rule of law in everyday life as part of an open society, a market economy with private property, universal suffrage, and the equal protection of human rights, civil rights, civil liberties and political freedoms for all people.” 

Source: Wikipedia.

Obviously, there is overlap between the two definitions above. Both neoliberals and democratic liberals can be unquestionably patriotic. Where they differ is in their respective overall theories of civilization. As a baby boomer, I watched the funeral of JFK, the Viet Nam War, the Chicago riots, the killings at Kent State, the deceitful Nixon years, all of the moon landings, and everything else to the present day. During this time, semiconductors went from discrete devices to integrated circuits and medicine has advanced to applied biochemistry. All of the sciences have taken advantage of improving technology and have advanced at incredible speed and the unit cost of advanced technology continues to drop. Of course there were bad times, but there were a great many good times as well. The overall result was a good standard of living for most people and freedom from most of the dread diseases of the past. Life spans have increased, an explosion of consumer goods & services providing employment and items making our lives more convenient.

According to the Pew Research Center, 44 % of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say that the US is giving too much aid to Ukraine. Not only that, but many Republicans are, if not outright admirers of Putin, view him more favorably than Biden, Harris, or Pelosi according to the Economist–YouGov poll of January, 2022. Liz Cheney refers to these people as the “Putin wing of the GOP.” In particular they admire his opposition to NATO, Western liberalism and LGBTQ+ rights. Is this because these Republicans have made a scholarly study of Putin against the backdrop of history and have concluded that he is worthy of their admiration over and above our democratic principles? Or are they parroting some sense of admiration drifting down from the GOP leadership? Decide for yourself.

Fascist, authoritarian leaders throughout history have always drawn the admiration of some fraction of a population. The 20th century alone had many standout examples and the trend continues to this very day. These leaders have convinced millions of people to ignore their own best interests and civil rights to support a cause that may have sounded exciting at a rally but led only to eventual oppression.

The Deep State

It appears that there really is a deep state in the US. It is the dark web of supporters, fund aggregators, lobbyists and fundraisers for the new ultra-conservative Republican party. These people wish to take us in the direction of more authoritarian and White Anglo Saxon Protestant (WASP) governance by gradually normalizing it. It’s like boiling the frog. This is not a Hollywood movie: the good guys could easily lose in the end. Once established, authoritarian regimes tend to last a long time, or at least, to the death of the tyrant. But sometimes the death of the tyrant only leads to continuation by another tyrant.

Trump and his ilk are succeeding in the normalization of regressive policy. Government-hating neoliberals and libertarians like Charles Koch and many others have been funding a movement for the demolition of most of the federal government in favor of a capitalist market-driven neoliberal Shangri-La. Remember when libertarian Grover Norquist said “I’m not in favor of abolishing the government. I just want to shrink it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub?” Libertarians and neoliberals aren’t anarchists, they just want the people with money and property to have the major input. Naturally, there is sympathy for this from many resource-heavy people.

Power has been defined as the ability to allocate resources. US national and global power is currently guided by taxpayer funded government. Both the private and public sectors add up to American hegemony. American business trends to increasing consolidation and is dominated by companies with the largest share of the resources. The natural end-state is monopoly. Business leaders piously repeat their appreciation of competition when, in reality, they are always trying to defeat the competition for market dominance. They will claim that market dominance is the ultimate result of achieving their fiduciary responsibilities- maximizing profit for the stockholders.

Boiling it down, libertarians and neoliberals want to abolish much of the state and federal government and focus on some kind of self-regulating market-based system. US economists always say that the market provides the most efficient use of capital. A market-based America will inevitably lead to a monopolistic corporate-based America. This is a system of economics, not governance. A plutocracy does not benefit the majority of us.

American corporations are not democratic in nature and make no pretense of it. They are autocracies ultimately answerable to the stockholders through a CEO and board of directors. State and federal government holds them answerable for adherence to the laws of the land. If there are a large number of burdensome regulations applying to the conduct of business, it is because sometime in the past, some individual or company has committed a harmful act leading to regulatory control. Regulations often stem from the dark side of past human behavior.

Back to Ukraine

Circling back, how does this talk of American politics relate to Ukraine? The Russian invasion of Ukraine and the Chinese threats over Taiwan and the Indo-Pacific region represent a period when major autocracies are pushing their boundaries. Russia is only held back because of NATO and other Western countries. China is held back because of its economic dependence on exports to Western nations who, surprisingly, will band together against them if threatened. I’m sure that they have also noticed that an otherwise simple military action of rolling tanks and troops into a “passive” territory like Ukraine can turn sideways rapidly. If anything, Putin has accomplished the opposite of his strategic goal of splitting up the members of NATO. It is critical now that US politics NOT cause us to abandon world affairs which is where Trump was leading us. The reelection of Trump would be an epic disaster for the free world and democracy.

A United States that tolerates the aggression of Russia or China is a country that cedes its global influence to them. Despite having lots of ugly history and a long list of regrettable decisions, the US remains a place that people want to immigrate to. You don’t hear about boatloads of immigrants attempting to get into Russia. If the US leaves a global leadership vacuum, guess who will jump in to take its place? Another liberal democracy? Seems unlikely.

Americans should remember that in the bathwater of US history there is a baby that needs to be cared for and not thoughtlessly discarded.

Russian Aggression Towards Ukraine

Leave a reply

Some Western-centric remarks.

  • The history of the present Ukrainian territory is not a happy one. The land has been soaked with Ukrainian blood by Hitler and Stalin. Not being a historian, I’ll defer to my betters for a more cogent account of the timeline of that territory.
  • I’m completely behind the Ukrainians in their resistance to Putin’s brutal war machine. Putin’s view is that Ukraine has been an administrative district of Russia all along and is now infested with NAZI brutes. That Ukraine fell under the control of NAZIs is absurd on its face, but to a Russian public trapped in a deep information silo, it is apparently plausible.
  • According to Ukrainian historian Serhii Plokhii at the Ukrainian Research Institute at Harvard, from 1918 there were repeated failed attempts by the Bolsheviks to gain control of Ukraine. Lenin relented and concluded that it was necessary to grant Ukraine formal independence by 1922. This was necessary for the Bolsheviks to maintain control over Ukraine. Ukraine was granted autonomy as an independent state within the Soviet Union.
  • In the recent 2023 meeting in Vilnius, NATO declined to accept Ukraine joining the organization. Russia has long made a show of believing that NATO wants to commit aggression against them. That NATO is a defensive pact somehow never sunk in. Ukraine joining NATO will only be seen by Putin as the latest and largest threat to Russian state security. Given how well the conventional military apparatus has performed in the attack on Ukraine, it isn’t safe to conclude that steady hands are hovering over the nuclear button.
  • With the violent history of Russia in eastern Europe, why would anyone want to start a war of aggression against Russia there? Let’s say that the West waged war against Russia and won. They are not a nation of people begging for western-style democracy. Russia resents the cultural, military and political dominance of the West, that is, Western hegemony. The collapse of the USSR was a major loss of face for a great many in the Soviet Union, especially for Lieutenant Colonel and later FSB director Vladimir Putin. Putin openly seeks to “Make Russia Great Again,” and like Trump, is surfing on a wave of fear and nationalism.
  • It seems certain that once Ukraine is in hand, Putin will continue with his murderous land-grab. The Baltic states, Poland, Georgia and a land corridor through Poland to Kaliningrad are all at risk and they know it. It is what was called the “Domino Theory” back in the cold-war days of the Viet Nam war. It was used to justify many military responses by the west to Russian expansionism.
  • For the West, the challenge is to keep Putin’s Russia contained and yet away from the nuclear precipice. It is a game of who can outlast who.
  • American apathy with foreign affairs has long been a common affliction. Sadly, the US Republican party is making a virtue out of admiring Putin and the burgeoning autocracy in Hungary. Since World War II, the US and Europe (formerly Western Europe) have had hegemony in the areas of dominant currency, finance, English language, military power projection and general commerce around the world. Today, Russia and China are quite clear that they wish to bring down this historical Western hegemony as soon as they can.

Definition: Hegemony, \hih-JEM-uh-nee\ noun. 1 : preponderant influence or authority over others : domination. 2 : the social, cultural, ideological, or economic influence exerted by a dominant group.

Wikipedia.

Definition: Liberal democracy is the combination of a liberal political philosophy that operates under a representative democratic form of government. It is characterized by elections between multiple distinct political parties, a separation of powers into different branches of government, the rule of law in everyday life as part of an open society, a market economy with private property, universal suffrage, and the equal protection of human rights, civil rights, civil liberties and political freedoms for all people. To define the system in practice, liberal democracies often draw upon a constitution, either codified or uncodified, to delineate the powers of government and enshrine the social contract. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_democracy#:~:text=In%20liberal%20democracy%2C%20an%20elected,distributes%20economic%20and%20social%20benefits.
  • Under Chinese or Russian hegemony the world order will be very different than that held by the US and Europe. The US and Europe have various versions of liberal democracy and support other nations who do as well. To view the future, just have a look at how these two countries conduct government in their own countries. Care to live under the Chinese Communist Party’s or under Putin’s world order? As an American, the English lingua franca, for better or worse, seems to work fairly well. Imagine Westerners switching to written and spoken Mandarin. At least Russian is based on an alphabet. Am I biased towards alphabetic languages? Definitely.

“… radical-left Democrats, Marxist, communists and fascists …”

1 Reply

I’m running out of words to describe the deplorable ex-president #45. Just when you think he can’t add to his steaming heap of manure called a legacy, he shovels on more. It seems like there is no limit to the falsehoods he is willing to declare in public and no limit to what his supporters are willing to accept.

In regard to his indictments, he was recorded as saying something to the effect of “They’re not after me, they’re after you … I’m just standing in their way!” He is turning his indictments into the image of him sacrificing himself on the cross for the millions of Americans. A blood sacrifice for his beloved followers. If you supposed that this vaudevillian stunt was transparently phony to everyone, you’d be wrong.

#45 has been referring to “… radical-left Democrats, Marxist, communists and fascists …” in his gimmie-all-yer-lovin’ rallies. How absurd. Leftists aren’t fascists- they are antifascists. And by the way, what is wrong with being against fascism? #45 is using his usual mirror tactic of taking accusations against him and aiming it back at his critics. He knows very well that he isn’t being held accountable for truthfulness by the people he counts on. He tells big lies and repeats them over and over. It works for him. The very boldness of his lies somehow validates them in the minds of his followers.

Marxism and socialism have been in the scrapyard of history for a decades. The Soviet experiment with using socialism to get to communism was an abject failure. Stalin’s USSR was a brutal, murderous dictatorship tarted up to appear as a people’s paradise for those outside the iron curtain.

China today is a single party communist dictatorship that practices centralized control and nationalistic state capitalism. Previously, however, under the command of Chairman Mao Zedong, it is estimated that 40 to 80 million people died as a result of starvation, persecution, prison labor and execution in order to achieve his personal dream of a communist paradise.

It is difficult to find a communist state where people have the liberties that we in the US take for granted. It seems that to compel people to hand over their belongings to the state, a good bit of muscle is needed. Stalin found this out when he tried to collectivize Ukraine in the early 1930s. He ended up causing mass starvation and sending people to the gulags. The notion that the US is under threat from communist influence is without credibility. The odd communist may pop up now and then but they are little more than a curiosity not worthy of concern.

It is hard to know what Republicans regard as radical about Democrat ideals. Could it be that anyone who disagrees with today’s GOP is a “leftist radical”? If there are actual living, breathing Marxists among liberals in the US, they are likely to be lonely. There is Richard D Wolff at UMass, Amherst. Wolff is against capitalism and makes some fair points, but the momentum of history won’t be going his way any time soon. People still remember the Soviet experiment with Marxism-Leninism which was a disaster.

So·cial·ism: noun; a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

Source: Google

Will citizens of the US ever acquiesce to turning over private property to a socialist government? Clearly, there is not a chance. The accusation that US liberals harbor socialistic desires is a Republican fever dream. The same with communism. The current population of US citizens would never embrace communism. Too many past instances of communist or socialist dictatorships in the world, and besides, Americans love their private property and would defend it with the umpteen hundred million guns under their pillows.

It is a Republican fantasy that only they are the true patriots in the US. This gives them license to posture as the only “real” Americans worthy of the title. This froze out as axiomatic for them many years ago, especially since the years of Mr. “trickle-down economics” Reagan.

Having social services is not the same as having socialism. A capitalist economy that provides a social safety net through taxation is not socialism. The capitalists still own their means of production, distribution and exchange.

Ordinary citizens in the US pay taxes to support the Army, Air Force, Space Force, Marines, Navy and Coast Guard. We also pay taxes and fees for upkeep on state and national infrastructure like roads, bridges, air traffic control and many other things. All of this goes to support our capitalist means of production, distribution and exchange.

Citizens pay exorbitant tuition to educate themselves to a level where they can contribute to operating our capitalistic enterprises. Payment for the common good isn’t borne exclusively by business. Both citizens and our capitalist enterprises benefit from this arrangement.

The business side should recall that citizens contribute to their corporate existence by funding their government contracts and by purchasing products that they off-shored to China to the detriment of US workers and security.

MIRV Talk

Leave a reply

Some vocabulary from bad old days of the Cold War has come back to haunt us. Russia has announced that it has deployed its RS-28 Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) in Belarus. The 112 ft long, 211 ton missile is said to carry 15 Multiple Independent Reentry Vehicles (MIRVs). As new and scary as this sounds, the US first conceived of the MIRV in the early 1960’s and deployed its first MIRV’d ICBM (Minuteman III) in 1970 and the first MIRV’d SLBM (Poseiden Sea Launched Ballistic Missile) in 1971. The USSR followed suit in 1975 and 1978, respectively.

In the early 1960’s it was believed in the US that it was behind the USSR in what was called the “Missile Gap”. It turns out this was incorrect and that, in fact, the US had a large advantage in the number of ICBM strategic delivery vehicles. For a long while we in NATO thought the Soviets were 10 feet tall and that turned out to be an exaggeration. From their performance in conventional battle, they have diminished in stature just a bit. However, their nuclear triad is to be respected.

3-MIRVs. Source: https://blenderartists.org/t/mirv-hard-surface-modeling/1198468

The initial purpose of the MIRV concept was to compensate for inaccurate delivery. It has evolved to include decoys and multiple target delivery. There is a good deal of non-classified information on MIRV systems on the interwebs.

Putin’s threat of a new MIRV’d missile is just more nuclear bluster to frighten NATO citizens. For the present time his nuclear weapons are more valuable in storage as they have been all along with the Mutual Assured Destruction policy. That said, they have a policy of using nukes if the security of the state itself is under threat. I would guess that Putin sees himself as the state.

I wonder if it has dawned on the Russians that nobody in their right mind would actually make a preemptive attack on Russia or its former Soviet satellites. Who actually wants the place? What benefit is there in trying to subdue 140 million angry Russians and their huge frozen taiga? That’s nuts.

Standing up for what you believe

Leave a reply

I’ve long had difficulty with the validity of advice that says “always stand up for what you believe.” Superficially, it is inspirational to those working in a difficult and discouraging situation. It is meant to convey encouragement that a person should strive not to give up on a difficult goal. Keep chipping away at the problem. You can eat an elephant, but only by one bite at a time. There are many aphorisms that tie into this sentiment. A crisp analysis of this is not like a problem in algebra, you know, a problem with a unique solution. If you share the person’s subjectivity, then perhaps there is no problem.

Standing up for what you believe is often used to proclaim a refusal to give up some action or view. It can telegraph moral clarity and devotion to an ideal.

What are we to think when a leader stands up and proclaims that they intend to stand firm on their convictions? Irrespective of whether or not you agree with them, doesn’t their proclamation to stand fast say something about flexibility in the face of contrary evidence or logic? If new thinking comes along, wouldn’t we want a leader who can turn the boat around to a better heading?

We don’t want wishy-washy or indecisive leaders- don’t we really want action based on the best thinking? In a democracy it is our job to put the best thinkers in the important slots.

The weakness of this advice comes into view when you consider whether any given goal is “worthy” or not. Is there objective information or reason supporting going after a goal or maintaining a belief? Even if a belief or goal is objectively valid, is it something worth committing your life to? Will it really lead to the desired end? On the personal level, someone may be convinced that a goal is indeed worthy and is backed with good intentions, tight reasoning or what appears to be justifying evidence.

A person may be genuinely convinced that their goal or belief is worthy irrespective of objective fact or analysis. They would be making a subjective decision to stay on the path for reasons of comfort or aesthetics. As long as your path is not harmful to those around you, why not?

People possessed of divine certitude in their politics or religion, for example, will often claim that a particular hill really is worth dying on. They are willing to defend their beliefs to their last breath, a few in the literal sense but most metaphorically speaking. Righteous though they may seem, are we obliged to stand by and let the firmly held but baseless or insane beliefs of others swerve our democracy into an autocratic swamp of fringe beliefs and looney political theories?

The societal problems are supposed to be addressed by voting based on rational thought and conveyed through freedom of speech. Today in the US, large and well-funded forces are focused on eliminating time-tested elements of democracy based on firmly held beliefs.

The practical difficulty in the US is that monied interests have the cash to buy media time to persuade the masses. Repetition of untruthful assertions and fearmongering are highly effective. Recruiting and inciting people into the dark side of politics is all too easy as the GOP has shown for decades. And yes, I’m taking sides.

This is my theory: From the view at 30,000 feet we can broadly divide thinking into two manifolds- analytical thinking and devotional thinking. Analytical thinking is that in which conclusions or practices are based on consideration of established secular principles, measurable evidence and the science behind cause and effect.

Devotional thinking is rationale based on adherence to doctrine- be it religious or political. A particular doctrine guides a person’s beliefs, emotions and actions or conclusions, maybe even in the face of contrary evidence.

Analytical thinking is my preference but it can go awry. Conclusions may be drawn from faulty evidence or previous thinking that is factually incorrect or poorly conceived. Worse, human thinking is subject to stranding in the cul-de-sac of confirmation bias. Many of us get stuck in this appealing comfort zone indefinitely. Beliefs or opinions are often cherished and difficult to release.

So, what do you say to a person who adheres to a belief that can be objectively contradicted with arguments based on data or rational analysis? How far along are we obliged to indulge a person in a faulty belief? Should we be supportive and encourage them to “stand up for what you believe” knowing full well that they are on a fool’s errand or their belief leads to actions troublesome for others?

This is where politics comes in as useful. In principle, poor thinking can be outvoted. A majority of poor thinkers with bad ideas is a problem as history shows. Assuring the survival of liberal democracy takes continual monitoring. Oh yes, the continuance of liberal democracy is axiomatic in my view.

No doubt this ground has been plowed by philosophers for centuries. But, I don’t call myself a philosopher.

Is it really our place to correct a person’s belief? Who am I to reset an adult’s thinking? If someone is operating on the basis of incorrect information, like a definition or a piece of data, it could be argued that correcting them would be an act of kindness. If someone is just full of harmless baloney, then perhaps they should be left to wander through life as is.

This situation has been part of the human condition forever. Everyone has the right to be an idiot now and then. But what happens when their idiocy becomes a problem for others or too self-destructive to stand by and watch in civil society?

Speaking for myself only, I’m inclined to ignore those who espouse ignorant or magical beliefs. I’ll steer clear of the flat-earthers or Baptists, for instance, as not worth the effort to engage. With homeopathy believers, in a moment of weakness I might engage with some words about basic chemical principles relating to dose/response relationships. With the anti-vaccine crowd … this a tough one. All too frequently I go non-linear and become scornful of those harboring misplaced fear or anger towards vaccination. I’ll start gibbering and sputtering if I don’t quit thinking about it.

Speaking of goofy beliefs, I’ve had a longstanding issue with most religions, the big 3 in particular. To me, standing up for something that derives from magical thinking and no evidence seems foolish. Writings of dubious origin and translated or edited over the millennia could be as source of fiction or a mixture of truth and fiction. Followers of religion operate under the belief that their religious doctrines are set in stone and are the basis for all moral behavior.

Religion finally boils down to being a theory of the universe. The big 3 religions have always struck me as transparently anthropomorphic rationalizations of the universe using iron age thinking. I used to engage with others on this for fun but it’s nothing but aggravation now.

Does science give us the ultimate view of the universe? We only get pieces of it directly. The universe most of us know is substantially based on our what our brains perceive via stimulation of the nervous system. What we can see is limited to a very narrow slice of the electromagnetic spectrum, maybe one octave wide. Light waves exist many octaves distant on either side of the visible range. On the high energy side, there is the gamma ray universe shining brightly from nuclear reactions in stars and other objects. On the low energy side is the radio universe shining away by larger scale mechanisms. Adjacent to the visible spectrum is the x-ray and ultraviolet spectrum. On the opposite side are infrared and microwaves. All can reveal insights based on how they interact with matter. We exploit imaging, spectroscopy and mathematics to understand the universe outside of the solar system.

But maybe the reality we experience is just a type of baseline hallucination that we think of as our “normal” consciousness.

Science is unable to help with the desire to know the supernatural. Science requires observation, quantification, measurement and analysis. I suppose that if you could start classifying and counting miracles per square kilometer, you could begin to understand the effects of location and type of miracle. Anyway …

Gosh. It seems that I’ve painted myself into a corner.

Chinese Espionage From Cuba

Leave a reply

This caught me by surprise. I have long suspected that Putin would establish a base in Cuba. Instead, the Chinese are working on it. According to the Financial Times, the Biden administration has disclosed that China has been conducting electronic espionage from Cuba since 2019. (This was reported by the Wall Street Journal 6/8/23, but the article is behind a paywall).

China’s spy balloon overflight of the US recently, if actually planned, was quite bold. They retort that US spy planes frequently fly along their borders. Setting up a spy base in Cuba has invaded what we have normally thought of as our back yard. What if China decides to conduct military training in the Gulf of Mexico? US territorial waters extend 12 nautical miles from shore. How should we react? The US supports Taiwan and has conducted military exercises in the waters between China and Taiwan. What would we have to stand on when we object?

Territorial waters. Credit: https://iilss.net/what-is-the-meaning-of-coast-in-law-of-the-sea-losc-and-customary-international-law/
Territorial and economic zone boundaries in the Gulf of Mexico. Credit: NOAA, https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/maps/gulf-data-atlas/atlas.htm?plate=Marine%20Jurisdictions

China has been cooperating with Cuba in terms of increasing trade including telecom and biotech. They are reportedly spending big money in the Port of Mariel.

China continues to aggressively spread its influence across the world while it continues to plead for “mutual trust and regional peace, stability and development.”

Plainly, China is aiming for economic and military hegemony around the world. Putin’s Ukrainian invasion blunder will take many years for Russia to recover from. What a post-Putin Russia looks like isn’t clear. Given the widespread intimidation and apathy of the population, the hope for a non-authoritarian Russia seems remote.

Meanwhile, as America dithers in its toxic pool of domestic politics and fratricide, China is moving to make the 21st century as China’s century. China must believe that we Americans are a bunch of f*ckin’ idiots. Maybe they’re right. Political conflict in the US has become too intoxicating and financially lucrative for rational governance.

Ball Sports. Pfft!

1 Reply

It turns out that I have no aptitude at all for ball sports or dancing. My long suffering spouse has been forced to dance without me. My natural athletic abilities are concentrated on my uncanny ability to jump out of the way or just standing back. This proclivity is rich in survival benefits. For instance, I’ve never torn a ligament sliding into first base or cracked my head on the dance floor. Nor have I ever taken an elbow to the eye in basketball. No abrasions or grass stains from flag football either.

I do rather like to watch rugby though. I admire the pre-game Māori Haka demonstration for its drama and its sincere invitation to rumble. Hockey is another one I can watch at the game. The puck is always in motion. Unlike baseball, with hockey or rugby something is always happening. Even if a rugby player is injured, they continue to play around the body. I admire that.

Baseball games are just too damned long, even with the new rules. Ninety minutes should do it. They just stretch it out for concession sales. Some folks like to guzzle $9 utility beers and gnaw on $14 slices of pizza to the sound of old timey organ music. I can go maybe once a season, but more? Nope.

Watching golf is a colossal snooze fest. I do enjoy watching chess matches though- even that is more exciting than golf. And the muted voices of the announcers as if they have to keep their voices low. Gimme a break. Golf is for idlers. It is a meaningless difficult task. I understand that golf is hard. I just don’t care. My conception of hell involves watching golf in church.

Basketball? If you can dunk the ball, the hoop is just too low. For crying out loud. Enough said.

NFL football? Good gravy. I just watch the last 5 minutes. The manufactured gladiator drama pitting millionaires against each other is just nauseating. And the guys delivering the play-by-play color in the background yammering on about failed strategy as if randomness had no part in it. With all of the rules, it is nearly a technology, not a game.

Soccer? Good grief. Need I say it?

Ok, time to come clean. It isn’t the sports so much as it is the immense crowds at these live events. I truly despise being in a crowd. In fairness, the crowd probably despises me back.

“Make America Florida” WTF??

Leave a reply

All around universal genius and gazillionaire Elon Musk will be engaging Florida Governor Ron DeSantis in a conversation that will include DeSantis’ announcement of his bid for the US presidency. The DeSantis krewe is obviously trying to distance themselves from #45, but not so much that they can’t poach his voters. They’re embracing capitalist folk hero and boy wonder Elon Musk’s endorsement in hopes of snagging MAGA voters who have grown weary of #45.

The DeSantis campaign has dreamed up the slogan “Make America Florida.” I’m incredulous at hearing this. Outside of Florida, “Florida Man” is a common reference to someone who is maniacal, irrational, delusional or insane. This is because, extrapolating from the news, Florida has an overabundance of them. More likely, there is more reporting of police notes than other places. Is it slander? Of course! It’s American humor unlikely to amuse outside of the US.

Credit: I don’t know, somewhere in the interwebs.

What remains to be seen is whether or not “Make America Florida” will catch on outside of the state. Especially in northern states outside of the old Confederacy. Some think that there is still a north/south divide in the US by some measures. I’ll leave that for others to expound on.

Applying DeSantis’ penchant for belligerent and punitive state politics, his presidency would surely be a setback for US democracy and a step forward for autocracy along the path the GOP is heading for. The GOP model of the US is not a place I’d care to live.

Baptist Hate-Preacher

Leave a reply

A video dropped from the sky showing Christian preacher Jason Graber of the Sure Foundation Baptist Church in Spokane advocating for the execution of the parents of transgender kids by a gunshot to the back of the head. This video is echoing all over the interwebs. It is important to realize that managers who oversee news distribution are duty bound to allow only items that attract the greatest number of eyeballs through the filter. Their job performance is judged on this basis. They curate the news minute-by-minute as it happens.

Graber is a small frog in a very large pond. He and his flock are a small group in Spokane. However, I’m sure that his homophobia and anti-trans speech rhymes with what a great many people believe. You do not have to be explicitly pro-gay or pro-transgender to see that these views are a stage-4 malignancy in our democracy.

However, there is nothing new to this kind of vile speech. This is part of hellfire and brimstone preaching that has been in America since the very beginning. Only today it is amplified and distributed broadly in the Mulligan stew of today’s electronic media. Who would have guessed that the invention of the transistor would lead to this?

Plainly this preacher-man does not represent the views of all Christians. Population attributes are generally distributed as a normal distribution or sometimes called a bell curve with extremes on each side. Let’s say in this case that on the left extreme are those of Christ-like temperament of love and forgiveness and on the right extreme are those of hellfire and brimstone temperament. This character is obviously on the hellfire and brimstone end of the curve. In a normal distribution the population of extreme members is low and the bulk of the members are midrange. The mathematical ideal is sometimes called a Gaussian distribution after the great mathematician Karl Friedrich Gauss**.

A normal distribution curve showing population percentages vs deviations from the average (Greek letter mu). Source: Simply Psychology, https://www.simplypsychology.org/normal-distribution.html

Brother Graber is very much on the extreme end of the curve, even for a fundamentalist. But the freakshow he puts on causes much rubbernecking on the great interstate highway of life. It makes him look bigger than he really is. Media rewards extremism with large viewership. Look at #45, the Elephant Man of media. You just can’t take your eyes off him.

One weakness of members of the human distribution is that many are liable to believe that his outrageousness is a measure of the purity of his righteous devotion to God. He is devoted alright. To a bronze-age deity who plays favorites and metes out lethal justice to the infidels. Historically, this kind of deity has always held an appeal to people. It so happens that I am not one of them. Tradition can offer great comfort for many. But it can also be unneeded baggage that bogs you down in the muck of obsolete beliefs. It is the imaginary cosmology of Deities, a theory of the universe that sees angels and demons lurking behind every tree. What’s behind every tree? The backside of the tree of course.

==========

**My blog name, Gaussling, is in honor of Gauss and in no way is meant to suggest that my mathematical abilities are anywhere near his. Au contraire.