Category Archives: PoliSci

Drowning Gov’t in the Bathtub

Leave a reply

In this politically turbulent time, I can’t help but recall a quote from Grover Norquist in 2001. From Liasson, Mara (May 25, 2001). “Conservative advocate”. Morning Edition. NPR.

“I don’t want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.”–Grover Norquist

The anti-government coup that is taking place presently resembles closely an attempt to convert the USA into a libertarian state. {How the Project 2025 elite will tolerate Trump’s authoritarian reflex is unclear.} More than just economics, there is also a component of Christian nationalism as well. From what I know about the John Birch Society, the combination of libertarianism and enthusiastic support from far-right Christian evangelicalism adds up to a theocratic-leaning anti-democracy regime. What’s wrong with minimal government? Some negatives are listed below. The six bullet points are copied directly from Google using the searched under libertarian negatives.

===========

  • “Increased inequality: Critics worry that with minimal government intervention and lower taxes, the gap between the wealthy and the poor could widen significantly. 
  • Difficulty addressing social and environmental problems: A philosophy that advocates for very limited government is criticized for being unable to effectively address issues like pollution, climate change, and other negative externalities that require collective action and regulation. 
  • Neglect of public goods and services: The libertarian ideal of minimal government may lead to underfunding or elimination of essential public services, which may negatively impact infrastructure, education, and social welfare programs. 
  • Conditional freedom: Some argue that a purely libertarian framework might make freedom conditional on an individual’s ability to afford certain protections or opportunities, failing to provide a baseline of security for everyone. 
  • Challenges in complex societies: The principles of libertarianism, which often rely on small-scale, community-based reasoning, may struggle to provide adequate solutions for the scale and complexity of modern societies and economies. 
  • Limited safety net: The minimal government model may not provide the necessary social safety net for those who are unable to work or are facing hardship, leaving vulnerable populations without support. “

============

What’s appealing about libertarianism? Again, straight from Google and searched under libertarian positives-

  • “Libertarians advocate the expansion of individual autonomy and political self-determination,
  • Emphasizing the principles of equality before the law and the protection of civil rights, including the rights to freedom of association, freedom of speech, freedom of thought and freedom of choice.”

============

What’s not to like about libertarianism in the above libertarian positives bullet points? In a more humorous mood, I might joke that libertarianism is the theoretical foundation which supports and normalizes greed. If not here already, we are approaching a new gilded age and Project 2025 will lock it into place. The lion’s share of natural resources and related industry is in the hands of fewer and fewer people and corporations. Theoretical question: Shouldn’t a child today expect that by virtue of being born on this planet expect to share in the resource wealth of this world? Every minute of every day, children are born into a world where its riches have already been hoarded by people or by entities far away.

The world is a hazardous place, and nature has many tricks to kill us. Our government in the US has been active in managing our safety and to construct frameworks to monitor infectious disease, dangerous weather, the actions of potential enemies, food safety, pollution, work safety, chemical and nuclear safety, air, land and sea transportation safety, and put in place and maintain the national highway system. Oh yes, and the US military is busy guarding our borders to protect commerce.

Over time our gov’t has identified ways to make life safer and healthier for all citizens, irrespective of race, color or creed. After WWII, the US became the global hegemon. While very far from perfect, the US has contributed to the health and wellbeing of countless people and countries. Where do so many people emigrating from their homelands want to go? To Russia or China? Until now the US was synonymous with opportunity and freedom. But the world has tired of US hegemony and new alliances are being forged.

The sly schemers at the Heritage Foundation who dreamt up Project 2025 seem to have put into play a populist movement that closely rhymes with Norquist’s idea. Make the unpopular cuts in the federal government during a conservative supermajority with a president who has risen to folk hero status. Presently, we are in a 2-year span between national elections. By the time the Democratic party has legislative or executive control, untying the MAGA/GOP web snugged into place will take a new Congress and a new president years to repair, if ever.

Trump is still in office partly because the bulk of the US population respects the national election schedule. In doing so, citizens are trapped in the stretch of history with him in office. This respect is in contrast to Trump’s disrespect for government institutions and the Constitution. His greed mentality, animated by his transactional approach to seemingly everything, keeps him pushing the boundaries of presidential norms. Instead of legislating his plans for the country, he rules by executive order and relies on the courts to validate his actions. The GOP strategy from years back of filling the courts with conservative judges is paying off by planting Trump-friendly judges in many districts. However, it doesn’t always payoff for the orange Jesus.

The viewpoint voiced by Michelle Obama saying to the effect of “if they go low, we go high” has fallen limp and become only a hopeful aphorism. The power of this statement seems inadequate to win many elections for liberal candidates. Part and parcel of the “Woke” accusation by MAGAs is the idea that liberals can’t stomach what needs to be done. It comes from the same playbook that includes advice to spank your kids and ignore the tragedy of gender misclassification. Dems, they say, are too soft headed to apply tough love.

In politics and religion, you find people who are devotees of particular doctrines that they perhaps do not understand clearly. If you are a devotional thinker, you strive to absorb doctrine. If you are an analytical thinker, you will make the effort to dissect an assertion and examine it for accuracy, clarity and implications. This is obviously a spectrum and “devotional” and “analytical” are the bookends of that spectrum. America is a mix of doctrinaire and analytical thinkers who may respond differently to a given idea or point.

The most effective way to outfox your political opponents is to make outrageous statements and repeat them endlessly à la Trump. An outrageous sentence takes only a few seconds to utter but can take many hours or days to research and prepare a rebuttal. Worse yet, the rebuttal isn’t guaranteed to get popular airtime unless delivered by a famous person like a late-night TV host, George Clooney or Gov. Newsom. We’ve become accustomed to outrageous statements paraded in the media in the form of a freak show. Everyone has watched satire and absurdism as entertainment. Superficially, Trump’s absurd statements seem to cray that no one could believe him. But people do take his ridiculous utterances seriously.

All of the legacy news organizations in the US media are owned by corporations. Corporations have both stockholders and stakeholders. Stockholders (owners) of a corporation can be the public, select individuals or the founder and/or upper management. The stakeholders are customers, employees, vendors and other organizations whose livelihood depends on the corporation. The management and stockholders of the major media outlets demand maximum quarterly profits (normal), so news directors have no motive to risk losing eyeballs to the competition for fear of losing their jobs. Newsrooms usually have a well-honed sense of what it takes to hold the flighty attention span of its audiences. Factually accurate and rational analysis, if ever delivered, are likely to remain on a hard drive unless there are some important heart strings to tug. News directors and editors are loathe to broadcast or print content that Dan Rather once called MEGO- My Eyes Glaze Over.

One of the attributes of stockholder ownership of a public stock is that the stockholders are very often like absentee landlords. They have nothing to do with the actual day-to-day operation of the corporation other than apply pressure on C-Suite management from a distance. To them, a given company is just a profitable parking spot for their cash irrespective of the merits of the company’s product to society. They have been given legal personhood but without the expectation of kindness and other human attributes. It’s hard to fathom how this might be different.

The popular news media are more accurately defined as semi-analytical show business.

While the news media have been bathing in the warm glow of its status as the 4th Estate, the inherent attribute of being a corporate entity with stockholders as absentee landlords is approaching the corporate bookend. That bookend can be found in the curriculum of any popular MBA program. Find the gap between the current state and the desired conditions and use KPIs, Key Performance Indicators, to close the gap. The more quantitative the KPIs, the more enshrined they’ll become in the C-Suite. It allows the accounting and finance MBAs to sit at their spreadsheets and plot impressive bar graphs with hockey stick projections of near-term EBITDA.

I will offer that if Trump somehow gets elected for a 3rd term, the USA as we knew it has collapsed. If a single party can manage to illegally keep a man in office for an extra term, then the government is very much out of control. At that point, what are the citizens to do? Sit and endure the new authoritarian state like so many have in history? Or do we take up arms and fight a tyrannical government? Isn’t that what the 2nd amendment to the Constitution is for? Something to think about.

Nuclear Dictator Putin

Leave a reply

This essay is written for Americans.

Here we are, it’s 2023 and the US has an old opponent run by a strongman dictator with nuclear weapons who is fond of reminding us about his nuclear arsenal. There is nothing like the Central Committee of the USSR that Putin has to contend with. Putin is not only angry with the US about aiding Ukraine, but he clearly wants to punish the US because of our continuing hegemony and a series of historical slights. He very much wants the US to experience suffering on our own territory like Russia did in WWII. Putin has always been unhappy with the collapse of the USSR and with what happened in the country thereafter. Putin’s theory of the world places Russia at the top of the great empires in history. His would be an authoritarian empire.

There has been a lot of knowledgeable commentary on what Putin may have concluded about western countries leading up to the invasion. I’ll defer to my betters in this.

Much propaganda has been issued by Russian state organs over the Putin years heralding the moral corruption and a disintegrating political structure within the US. He sees a US that is an aging empire in decay. Despite his large intelligence apparatus, he overestimated the capacity of his conventional forces and underestimated the resolve of Ukrainians. He apparently guessed that his invasion would be met with an indecisive NATO dithering away and only able to muster small support for Ukraine. His mistakes have proved to the world that the Russians are not 10 feet tall after all.

My feeling is that the US and NATO must be extremely watchful through this period of history. Putin’s government is unlike any adversary we’ve had before. They have already put effort into sowing confusion in US media and continue to try to influence our elections. They are likely to have SLBM submarines lurking off our coasts in readiness. Even worse, there are many within the current US GOP that seem to be willing to support or tolerate authoritarian regimes.

For as much as Putin is making veiled threats of nuclear conflict, he surely knows that if there are nuclear missiles headed for the US, we will not allow our missile fleet to be destroyed sitting in their silos. Only the first nuclear weapon unleashed with be a difficult decision.

The world has much to lose if it allows a man like Putin to invade his neighbors. Such a Russian empire so established will exert its authoritarian influence around the world much like China is attempting to do presently. The democratic nations of the world must work together to keep a world order that encourages free trade, travel, cultural exchange, open communication and a devotion to the betterment of all mankind.

The US has long been practicing liberal democracy. It has been very successful in raising the standard of living for all Americans, very often in ways that are not fully appreciated. So there is no confusion, liberal democracy doesn’t mean “Democrat democracy”. It is a system of representative democracy operating as defined bv the US Constitution with a separation of powers and many checks and balances. The engine of the nation is a market economy with private property and respect for individual and civil rights.

Our democracy and economic engine has given the US and the world a great many benefits in science, engineering, consumer goods, and medicine. The US has had the most productive economic and scientific engines the world has ever seen. We also built and maintained the most powerful military in history based on discipline, rules and strong moral leadership. The US continues to lead the world in the critical area of aerospace.

Our Government-Industrial-University R&D complex has been the envy of the world since after WWII. Scientific and industrial R&D is a powerful combination for sustaining prosperity. It is this that I most worry about when government comes under the current brand of GOP leaders. This is the goose that layed the golden egg.

We Don’t Understand Russia

Leave a reply

I believe that we in the US must understand that Russia has a history and perspectives that are very different from our own. We have very different languages, alphabets, traditions, folklore and lessons from history. Russia’s land was invaded in WWII by a very capable and violent enemy. Russians suffered and died in great numbers under the dictatorship of Joseph Stalin. Russian civilian and military losses during WWII have been estimated to be as high as 40 million dead. Russians continued to suffer in the suffocating grip of Soviet socialism until the collapse of the USSR. These dreadful experiences are layered over a long history that has never been exposed to the liberal democracy or free market capitalism that Americans have benefitted from immensely and take for granted.

It has been my habit to be circumspect about Russia. I studied a bit of Russian language in college, have a handful of Russian colleagues and have been to Russia on business. I enjoy 18th and 19th century Russian literature. I’m certainly no Russia scholar but I am sympathetic towards ordinary Russians who suffer under government repression and subsistence living, especially outside of Moscow or Saint Petersburg. Repression and poverty have been with Russia throughout history. Russia was an absolute monarchy up to the Bolshevik revolution in 1905-1917. It was a feudal society operating under a manorial system. Serfdom was common in Tsarist Russia from as early as the 12th century until 1861 when it was abolished. The Bolshevik revolution put an end to Tsarist rule with the abdication of Tsar Nicholas II in 1917 and murder of the Tsar and his family in 1918.

Today, President Vladimir Putin and his political machine have fabricated reasons to justify a violent military invasion in order to fulfill his dream of the unification of a greater Russian empire. Putin knows he won’t be stopped by a political uprising in his country. He seems quite confident that he can unleash brutal violence on the Ukrainian people without worry of a significant backlash at home. The people who fled Russia during the recent conscription are not present to protest against the war effort.

It is easy to believe that if anyone is the first to release a nuclear weapon, it is likely to be Putin or a successor. Release of a nuclear weapon will only be a difficult decision the first time. Once unleashed somewhere, reluctance for use will drop across the world.

The mountain of sanctions on Russia has had the side effect of bolstering Putin’s case that Russia is suffering from oppression from its western enemies. Putin’s response has only been to ratchet up the shelling of Ukraine. He will weaponize everything within his grasp and bring his hammer down as powerfully as he can.

My point today is that the EU, USA, and NATO must be extremely cautious with Russia in the present period of conflict yet maintain vigorous support for Ukraine and other border countries. Ukraine must be supplied with as much firepower as possible without direct conflict between NATO and Russia. Fortunately, that seems to be what is happening so far. While there are two opposing uniformed armies, Putin is using civilian collateral damage in Ukraine as a strategy to terrorize the population into submission.

My concern is the uncertainty of long-term political stability in US policy towards Russia, Ukraine and support for NATO. The US must maintain a firm opposition to Putin’s expansionism. Putin (and Xi for that matter) is clearly aiming to topple US hegemony in the world and would like nothing more than to see the US recede in influence. If you are not from the US, maybe this doesn’t sound so bad. But someone will aim for global hegemony and get it. Who is the least unfortunate choice?

Unfortunately, the disastrous presidency of Trump in the US gave the world in general, and Russia and China in particular, the impression that the US was in cultural decline due to moral corruption. We were perceived as a tired superpower rotting from within. A power vacuum will always be filled by some nation either abruptly or a centimeter at a time.

The political situation for Lukashenko in Belarus seems very precarious. It is hard to believe that he is a complete patsy for Putin. Knuckling under to Russia has to chafe at least a little bit. Russia has amassed firepower along the border joining Belarus and Ukraine and seems poised for action. Putin is also threatening Moldova over the safety of Russian troops in Transnistria. Any European state sharing a border with Russia has much cause for alarm. I’m guessing that Poland is worried about Russia capturing land to join the Kaliningrad Oblast to the rest of the country.

Putin will stop his aggression only when he is dead. Even then, a successor like Medvedev would likely continue the autocratic trend begun by Putin. Autocracies are notably difficult to take down. This war can play out in any number of ways.

He Just Keeps Talking

Leave a reply

WARNING. Political content follows.

While whining about how the 2020 election should be redone due to alleged fraud and how Twitter was trying to limit posts on Hunter Biden, #45 let this gem slip out-

“A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,”

The response by politicos to this assertion has fallen along party lines, with the Republicans remaining largely quiet on the matter. One republican who did comment on “This Week” with George Stephanopolous was Ohio Rep. (R) Dave Joyce. When asked if he would support #45 in 2024, he said he would support whomever the Republican nominee is.

From the interview-

“That’s a remarkable statement,” Stephanopoulos said. “You just said you’d support a candidate who’s come out for suspending the Constitution.

“Well, you know, he says a lot of things,” Joyce said, adding, “I can’t be really chasing every one of these crazy statements that come from any of these candidates.”

“You can’t come out against someone who’s for suspending the Constitution?” Stephanopoulos pushed back once again.

“He says a lot of things, but that doesn’t mean that it’s ever going to happen. So you got to [separate] fact from fantasy — and fantasy is that we’re going to suspend the Constitution and go backwards. We’re moving forward,” Joyce said.

Joyce is chair of the Republican Governance Group which is a centrist group in the House of Representatives.

The words of Joyce seem refreshingly frank and vaguely dismissive of #45’s chances in 2024. While many of his Republican colleagues may actually find #45 repugnant on a personal level and a danger to democracy, all of them are attracted to #45’s voters like moths to a flame. He may be a jerk, but he’s OUR jerk.

It’s amazing that #45 seemingly hasn’t realized that the more he talks the more disgusting he appears. If he would simply shut his yap he’d be much better off. However, if he did that, he wouldn’t get the free media exposure- good and bad- like he got in 2016.

Oh Marjorie, What Next?

1 Reply

Warning. If you don’t like liberal political content, then it’s probably best to move along.

Marjorie Taylor Greene was taken to task on her earlier statements suggesting that dark Jewish interests were involved in corruption at PG&E and certain California wildfires. In November 2018, she went on a Twitter diatribe about wildfires in California and how it appeared to some that “lasers or blue beams of light” caused the fires. Earlier in the tweet, Greene said that a PG&E board member was also vice chairman of Rothschilds, Inc., an international investment banking firm, and had provided funding to Gov. Jerry Brown. Brown, she claims, signed a bill that allowed PG&E to pass it’s costs from the fires along to the customers. She claims later that she didn’t know that using the word “Rothschilds” was an anti-semitic dog whistle. There may be elements of truth imbedded in her brain dump of words.

Then Greene strings the “analysis” along to PG&E’s connection to Solaren and space-based solar energy generators. She speculates that the orbital solar energy generator may have mistakenly beamed energy onto California and started the wildfires.

This is a good example of how conspiracy theories get started. There is some foundational truth in her words. PG&E had agreed to purchase energy from the startup Solaren as early as 2009. And Solaren did have technology for the beaming of RF energy from space. However, the story goes non-linear when anecdotal information arises claiming that “lasers or blue beams of light” are seen coinciding with forest fires where inference transmogrified into cause. Greene does not overtly state that energy from space in fact caused the fires. A knot of brain cells somewhere tells her to be careful with that. Greene only has to raise the question to imply it.

This is exactly what Fox News people like Carlson and Hannity do. They misdirect by claiming that they were “only asking the question.” In fact they are asking leading questions. A leading question is one that prompts a desired answer. It is a very effective tool in grooming anger, fear and suspicion in the population as well as bringing profitable ad revenue to Fox. For people who enjoy being lead into the dark side, saying that they are being bamboozled won’t matter. This dark art would not have been unknown to propagandists like Joseph Goebbels.

The question for the rest of us is this- How do we discourage unfounded conspiracy mania in political discourse? Continuous education? Loud denials with stamping of the feet? My feeling is that it only begins early with better secular K-12 education that sharpens analytical skills in young people. But that is the easy part. The harder part would be increasing economic opportunity for a middle class life and affordable housing. If life is a constant struggle to make ends meet, if you have little or no discretionary income, or if you have a go-nowhere job, then anger and despair with “the deep state” will be a constant companion and discolor your outlook. My guess is that most MAGA adults are refractory to persuasion and are likely to live out their lives with their misguided Trump fantasies.

Silent, democracy-minded people out there can help by speaking up and voting, to begin with. False and misleading assertions should not go unanswered. Advertisers who pay for the broadcasting of inciteful and malignant content should be shunned on the large scale. People like Australian Rupert Murdoch must be held accountable for the purposeful and profitable content that damages American culture. True damage to America does not require the breaking of laws. It only requires the loss of faith in democracy.

Liberalism and its Discontents

2 Replies

An interesting review of a book titled Liberalism and its Discontents by political scientist Francis Fukuyama of Stanford University appeared in the internet magazine Quillette recently. The author of the review, Seamus Flaherty, is a writer and historian. The article struck me, as a moderate liberal, as a fair analysis of historical liberalism and where it might be going. I won’t rattle on about the article except to say that the final paragraph below sums up nicely some informed thoughts about liberalism. Flaherty writes-

“According to Fukuyama, the best we can hope for is a liberalism aware of its flaws, a liberalism that “prioritizes public-spiritedness, tolerance, open-mindedness, and active engagement in public affairs,” is unembarrassed by national identity and cultural tradition, seeks to devolve power to the lowest feasible levels of government, and accepts human limits and promotes the virtue of moderation. A liberalism, in short, which seeks to compensate for its own ineradicable shortcomings. In so saying, Fukuyama sounds a lot like a reticent Red Tory or Blue Labourite—a critic of liberalism who is not anti-liberal—an impression created throughout his new book. Now, that is “progress.” What Fukuyama succeeds in showing us is that liberalism need not be commensurate with the extremes of individualism or wokeism. His version of liberalism repudiates both.”

A final comment about vocabulary. In looking up an unfamiliar word found in the article, I encountered the words that describe my world view quite well. Meliorism: the idea that progress is a real concept leading to an improvement of the world. It holds that humans can, through their interference with processes that would otherwise be natural, produce an outcome which is an improvement over the aforementioned natural one. Yeah, I like it.

From PC to Woke-ness

1 Reply

Linked here is an earlier essay on the evolution of political correctness (PC) as I have witnessed it. Before the epithet of “woke-ness” came along there was PC. In the early 2000’s rancid and cynical criticism of PC was trotted out and displayed as some kind of analysis by ultraconservative broadcasters and Christian evangelicals. PC as an epithet was useful for casting fuzzy accusations and to infer a kind of pathetic naivety to the mindset of progressive people. The accusation was difficult to counter and it gained wide spread use.

To counter the accusation of PC as a negative, one had to convince the accuser that fair treatment for all was a good thing and that the use of racial and ethnic slurs was a bad thing, not an unconstitutional imposition on free speech or an implied slur on white people. Defending PC in practice meant holding the accuser’s attention long enough to step through the morals and logic of PC- a tough exercise in listening for some people. It is another example of how it is easier to destroy than to build.

Zoning and Hard Times, Again

Leave a reply

I’m recirculating a few posts from long ago because I think they raise interesting points. This link relates to a problem with local zoning ordinances. The issue came to me after a trip to Bangkok, Thailand, some years ago where I got hopelessly lost on foot. I hope that reposting certain essays isn’t too tedious to the gentle reader.

Woke-ism

1 Reply

Well, cut off my legs and call me short. I finally looked up the definition of “woke”. Google defines it as “alert to injustice in society, especially racism“. How puzzling. It doesn’t seem obvious why the word has become a foul accusation. Maybe it is because it has been associated with the dreaded affliction of socialism. Woke is a condition that strikes me as morally virtuous. I guess if that dapper lad, Tucker Carlson, or if that malignant showboat #45 misuse a word long enough and frequently enough, many followers will latch on to their deceptive vocabulary. Regular folks who polish their political acumen by watching Fox will often pick up the vocabulary of Republican talking points. Listen for it. Goebbels would have been impressed by this applied art of persuasion.

What philosophical swamp fever is it that afflicts Florida Republicans? Rep Matt Gaetz (R-Fla) recently accused the US SecDef Austin and the pentagon leadership of being under the grip of “woke-ism” during a recent House Armed Services Committee hearing. Gaetz had to be reminded that it wasn’t the US that invaded Ukraine. Casting the false aspersion of “woke” is very much like accusing someone of believing in diversity, equity and inclusion. I would take it as a compliment.

Toxic News. Lamentations of a Liberal.

Leave a reply

Warning. I’m hammering on Trump. If this bothers you, please move along.

I really have to back off on the consumption of news. My attitude has become far more misanthropic than usual. Between the savage war in Ukraine, Trump’s traitorous boy crush on Putin and bills signed by that demon-seed governor of Florida, my head is throbbing from the noise of all the dissonant waves coming in. Surely, something is going right in the world, isn’t it? Maybe?

Part of what is stressful is the inability to intervene personally, to make a positive difference. Oh, to have 2 minutes to yell at #45. Or to remind DeSantis and the Florida legislature that their elementary schools have never taught sex education and have never given kids instruction on how to choose alternative genders or lifestyles. It would be disastrous for any teacher’s career and they know it. This LGBTQ instruction “issue” in K thru 3rd grade is entirely invented to agitate the excitable and poorly informed on a certain side of the bell curve. This is social conservative engineering boldly executed in plain view and vastly amplified by instant distribution on social media. DeSantis is maneuvering to be an alternative to Trump in 2024, which is a choice between bad and awful.

Trump is morally bankrupt. This should be obvious to any high school graduate who paid attention is school. He is a real estate developer who banks on his special gift of persuasion. His speaking style is well suited to that of an after dinner speaker. He teases his audience by saying naughty things and mugs and poses behind a false modesty, all of this while he is not making outrageous claims about his abilities. And many people eat it up. It is a very effective rhetorical style polished by years of practice. His time on reality TV has helped hone an air of authority and expertise in organizational management.

He learned that if you are going to exaggerate, make it big and repeat as often as possible. Throw great gobs of it and see what sticks to the wall. This is propaganda 101: Political persuasion through any means available.

As corrosive to American democracy as Trump is, there is a bigger problem. That would be the matter of his large crowd of eager voters. They seem to be of a disposition that instinctively distrusts government and lays a large part of the blame of alleged government malfeasance on liberalism. Since the days of Reagan, the word “liberal” has come to be an epithet through repeated encouragement by Republicans. Blame for societies ills on liberalism was further exaggerated by Newt Gingrich in the 1990’s. Unfortunately, this guy has reappeared and is frequently interviewed in conservative (Fox) news today.

I can remember stopping by a booth at the Boulder County fair in the mid 70’s which was occupied by the John Birch Society. They are ultraconservative, staunchly antigovernment and libertarian in orientation. I see many similar traits in the earlier Tea Party and in the current MAGA crowd. Unfortunately, once someone embraces this kind of mind-set, they rarely come back towards the middle in my experience. Distrust, fear and paranoia are things the human brain does very well.

Never in the history of humanity have so many people had a platform for the instant broadcast and receipt of political information. It is a challenge to the stability of a democratic nation when fringe ideas spread and are adopted across the population in a matter of days. Not everyone remembers history or has a grasp of basic political and economic concepts. In prior times, there were limits to the accessibility, reach and variety of news and opinion. There was also editorial control over what got published. Fringe letters to the editor or op-eds were published once and that was it. The reach was often limited to where the paperboy went.

With most of social media in much of the world there is no editorial control. Any brilliant or stupid post gets broad circulation with equal ease. The volume knob has been turned up for individuals who wish to practice the art of persuasion. Unfortunately for the Chinese and Russian people, their governments are clamping down on the content of both received and sent information.

Back to toxic news. Broadcast companies are businesses. Broadcast news has a job to do. It is to deliver as many eyeballs to ad messages as possible. It’s the same with social media. What gets aired is that which is compelling to the eyes and heart. And “compelling” draws eyeballs. To expect to get an education or a balanced view from commercial TV is a fools errand. Some people believe that “balanced” means that all views are equal. Well, some views are based upon a false premise and are unworthy of consideration. Also, the old saying “if it bleeds, it leads” still applies no matter what pious talk you may hear about journalism.