Month: November 2021

The Price of Our Silence

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

These words were written by Martin Niemöller (1892-1984) a German theologian. As a young man he was an avid and loyal German military officer, first in the Imperial German Navy, then in WWI a U-Boat commander. In 1920 he decided to follow in his father’s footsteps and began seminary training at the University of Munster.

Niemöller was a staunch supporter of the coming of the Third Reich. Until in 1934 he along with two prominent Protestant bishops had a personal meeting with Adolph Hitler to discuss the state’s pressures on churches. At that meeting it became clear that Niemöller’s phone had been tapped by the Gestapo, and that the group he represented, the Pastors Emergency League, had been under close state surveillance.

That meeting was a wake-up call for Niemöller. It changed everything for him, and he began to see the Nazi state as a dictatorship. He devoted the remainder of WWII combatting Nazism from the inside. In 1937 he was arrested and eventually confined in the Sachsenhausen and Dachau concentration camps. His crime was “not being enthusiastic enough about the Nazi movement.” Niemöller was released in 1945 by the Allies.

Today in Trump’s angry minorities of the far-right wing of American politics we see a similar danger to us that Niemöller saw in the emergent Nazi party of his days. There’s only one way: their way. Any and everything else is met with absolute annihilation. They are intolerant of any other option, any other path for America. During the past few months, I’ve seen a storm of articles The Washington Post, The New York Times, on CNN, MSNBC, the major networks, The Atlantic—the list goes on and on, warning America of the growing dangers of the Trumpian right-wing to American democracy. They all emphasize: this is a genuine threat, not a passing trend or phase. And it cannot be ignored.

There is a serious, organized effort underway to legitimize the views of the radical right-wing anger, along with all of its many prejudices. For example: ● at least 10 people involved in the Capitol riots were just elected to state and local office, ● at least 5 more are running for Congress.

We have to speak up, with our voices, with our votes. I underestimated Trump’s electability and appeal in 2016. I won’t do it again. And neither should you. The price of our silence will be our democracy.

How U.S. Gun Culture Stacks Up With the World

Following facts are highlights from a CNN news story that ran 2021-11-26.

● The U.S. is the only nation in the world where civilian guns outnumber people

● There are 120 guns for every 100 Americans

● About 44% of US adults live in a household with a gun, and about one-third own one personally, according to an October 2020 Gallup survey.

● U.S. firearm manufacturing is on the rise, with more Americans buying guns.

● U.S. has the highest firearm homicide rate in the developed world.

● Almost a third of US adults believe there would be less crime if more people owned guns, according to an April 2021 Pew survey.

● U.S. was home to 4% of the world’s population but accounted for 44% of global suicides by firearm in 2019.

● U.S. recorded the largest number of gun-related suicides in the world every year from 1990 to 2019

● No other developed nation has mass shootings at the same scale or frequency as the U.S.

● As of the date of the publication of this article the U.S. has had 641 mass shootings.

● A gun reform bill in stuck in the U.S. Senate.

Meanwhile in Texas where I live, we have some of the most shockingly irresponsible gun laws in the nation.

● no permit required to purchase handguns or long guns

● a gun owner does not have to register his firearm

● no gun license required to own a firearm

● everyone is allowed to openly care any firearm, no permit required

● everyone is allowed to carry a concealed firearm

● there is no magazine size limit on any firearm

Another thought-provoking read on this subject is Key facts about Americans and guns, a Pew Research Center Survey.

None of this reflects well on the U.S. or Texas. In the long term it invites chaos, and seems demonstrably inconsonant with America’s idealistic claims of being a guiding light to other nations. On the issue of gun culture, we are an example of what should be avoided by other nations, not emulated.

For the People Act of 2021

If you're not familiar with the details of the For the People Act, you should be. I've provided a summary below. Passage of this bill is essential to preserving our democracy and we all should be urging our elected representatives in Congress to work for it, and see that it becomes the law of the land.

Summary:

Rep. Sarbanes, John P. [D-MD-3] (Introduced 01/04/2021)
Sen. Merkley, Jeff [D-OR] (Introduced o3/17/2021

The bill will address voter access, election integrity and security, campaign finance, and ethics for the three branches of government.

● Expands voter registration (automatic and same-day registration)

● Expands voting access ( vote-by-mail and early voting)

● Limits removing voters from voter rolls

● Requires states to establish independent redistricting commissions to carry out congressional redistricting

● Sets forth provisions related to election security, including

  1. –supporting states in securing their election systems
  2. –developing a national strategy to protect U.S. democratic institutions
  3. –establishing in the legislative branch the National Commission to Protect United States Democratic Institutions
  4. –other provisions to improve the cybersecurity of election systems

● Addresses campaign finance

  1. –including by expanding the prohibition on campaign spending by foreign nationals
  2. –requiring additional disclosure of campaign-related fundraising and spending
  3. –establishing an alternative campaign funding system for certain federal offices

● Addresses ethics in all three branches of government

  1. –including by requiring a code of conduct for Supreme Court Justices
  2. –prohibiting Members of the House from serving on the board of a for-profit entity
  3. –establishing additional conflict-of-interest and ethics provisions for federal employees and the White House

● Requires the President, the Vice President, and certain candidates for those offices to disclose 10 years of tax returns.

All these provisions are essential and obvious necessities for protecting the most basic element of democracy: the peoples' voice. The right to vote freely without coercion or manipulation through gerrymandering or bizarre election rules.

Embracing destruction

Rambling through Shakespeare’s sonnets this morning I came across Sonnet 147, and to my surprise it rang stunningly fitting to our historical moment. The sonnet, of course, is about a lover whose beloved not only is underserving of his loyalty and affection but is actually destructive to him personally. And yet he persists in his loyalty to his beloved even though it will mean his own destruction.

Yes, I’m thinking about Donald Trump’s enablers, whether in Congress, or in the corporate world, or in the cities, towns, and communities throughout this country. All of them loyal to him still, even in the face of his destructive course to the end.  

What we see happening with Trump’s loyal enablers, and with the loyal lover of this sonnet, is one of the many mysteries in the contradictions of human nature: Why do we sometimes embrace our own destruction?

My love is as a fever, longing still
For that which longer nurseth the disease;
Feeding on that which doth preserve the ill,
The uncertain sickly appetite to please.
My reason, the physician to my love,
Angry that his prescriptions are not kept,
Hath left me, and I desperate now approve
Desire is death, which physic did except.
Past cure I am, now reason is past care,
And frantic-mad with evermore unrest;
My thoughts and my discourse as madmen’s are,
At random from the truth vainly express’d;
For I have sworn thee fair, and thought thee bright,
Who art as black as hell, as dark as night.

Weasel Words

I imagine most people have used Wikipedia. It’s a common go-to site for quick reference to find basic information about almost anything. It’s a free, nonprofit reference site supported by readers’ donations.

In this age of growing feints and deceptions in social media, politics, and the Internet in general, Wikipedia’s entry on “Weasel Words” is a good place to visit from time to time remind ourselves how important it is to be vigilant.

A weasel word or phrase is often used when someone wants to give the impression that something specific and authoritative is being expressed when in fact it is only a vague generalization. Weasel words are invaluable tools for people who want to deceive, and they are essential elements of propaganda. They can also be used to make a statement more ambiguous than it is.

Entire books have been written about weasel words but here are a few examples from the Wikipedia article about them.

“A growing body of evidence . . .” (Where is the raw data for the reader to verify?)

“Up to sixty percent . . .”   (so, 59%? 50%? 10%?)

“There is evidence that…” (What evidence? Is the source reliable?)

“The vast majority…” (75%? 85%? 99%? How many?)

“Questions have been raised…” (Implies a fatal flaw has been discovered; also who raised the questions?)

“Researchers believe . . .”  (Who are they?)

A 2009 study of Wikipedia found that most weasel words in it could be divided into three main categories:[12]

  1. Numerically vague expressions (for example, “some people”, “experts”, “many”, “evidence suggests”)
  2. Use of the passive voice to avoid specifying an authority (for example, “it is said”)
  3. Adverbs that weaken (for example, “often”, “probably”)

As I said, books have been written about weasel words, but these examples give us a glimpse into how easy it is to accept the anonymous voices we hear and read every day if we aren’t vigilant. All of us should be reading critically. And applying critical thinking to everything we encounter on the Internet. Alice’s rabbit hole hides in plain sight just about everywhere today.

(By the way, if I had left off the two words “I imagine” at the beginning of this post, I would have been guilty of using weasel words in my opening sentence.)

The Changing Times

We know that nothing ever stays the same, that change is constant and inevitable. Heraclitus is famously attributed the idea that “No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it’s not the same river and he’s not the same man”.

Nothing ever stays the same—except, I think, human nature.

Regardless, one of the ways we survive the constant change is by adapting. Adapt or die is a common cliché. And now, with the arrival of the digital age, we see that not only do things continue to change but we’ve now been introduced to the acceleration of change. Things change faster, monumentally faster, so fast its difficult for many of us to absorb the implications of what those changes are. We see this every day.

But it’s true, too, that change has consequences.

All of these ideas and issues play a significant role in a recent article in The Atlantic Monthly: “A Secretive Hedge Fund is Gutting Newsrooms,” by McKay Coppins. This article tracks the demise of the Chicago Tribune and sees it as a prime example of what is happening to local newspapers all across the nation. Coppins says,

In the past 15 years, more than a quarter of American newspapers have gone out of business. Those that have survived are smaller, weaker, and more vulnerable to acquisition. Today, half of all daily newspapers in the U.S. are controlled by financial firms, according to an analysis by the Financial Times, and the number is almost certain to grow.

Coppins quotes David Simon, a former Baltimore Sun reporter turned screenwriter, and author of the television series, “The Wire,”

“The practical effect of the death of local journalism is that you get what we’ve had,” he told me, “which is a halcyon time for corruption and mismanagement and basically misrule.”

So how do we adapt to this enormous change in our culture if we are to survive? Do we need to adapt? Or do we just watch it happen and live with the consequences?

I urge you to read this article. There’s a lot of food for thought in it. And some alarm bells as well.