Join us at our brand new blog - Blue Country Gazette - created for those who think "BLUE." Go to www.bluecountrygazette.blogspot.com

YOUR SOURCE FOR TRUTH

Monday, July 31, 2023

TRUMP'S MINDLESS TOOLS: Dietrich Bonhoeffer explained how stupidity enables MAGA

ScreenShot2023-07-25at6.42.07PM.png

By the Critical Mind

Community

Daily Kos

REPUBLISHED BY:

Blue Country Gazette Blog

Rim Country Gazette Blog

In the 1930s, as many Germans were swept into an antisemitic fervor by the Nazis, while others stood by and did nothing, the Lutheran Pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer actively resisted Hitler’s genocide. In April 1943, the Gestapo arrested him. The authorities accused him of being a part of the July 20, 1944, plot to assassinate Hitler. In April 1945, he was hanged by the Nazis, two weeks before WWII ended.

Few people have had a better view and a deeper understanding of the forces that caused so many unexceptional citizens to become cogs in the Nazi's death machine. At the end of 1942, Bonhoeffer dissected the causes of the Nazi rise to power in his essay “After Ten Years." In the piece, he reflected on the role of stupidity in enabling tyranny.

        “Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice. One may protest against evil; it can be exposed and, if need be, prevented by use of force. Evil always carries within itself the germ of its own subversion in that it leaves behind in human beings at least a sense of unease.”

Bonhoeffer argues that evil is a quality that even its perpetrators recognize is immoral — even as they might excuse its use to advance a ‘worthy’ end. Stupidity has no such internal check. Evil has a purpose. Stupidity just is. He continues:

“Against stupidity we are defenseless. Neither protests nor the use of force accomplish anything here; reasons fall on deaf ears; facts that contradict one’s prejudgment simply need not be believed — in such moments the stupid person even becomes critical — and when facts are irrefutable they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental. In all this the stupid person, in contrast to the malicious one, is utterly self-satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack.”

Anyone who has tried reason on a MAGA knows they reject facts and embrace comforting conspiracy theories. Some MAGAs — especially friends and family — may appear superficially accepting of a sensible argument. But as soon as they return to the internet, they are again down the Q rabbit hole.

Sometimes we discover that people we consider intelligent and may have advanced degrees are just as resistant to reality as the low-IQ, poorly-educated cultist. Bonhoeffer explains:

“There are human beings who are of remarkably agile intellect yet stupid, and others who are intellectually quite dull yet anything but stupid.”  

Stupidity is a quality that may correlate with IQ, but it is by no means a predictable relationship. Most of us have thought at some time, “How can (fill in the blank) be so fecking stupid?” Bonhoeffer elucidates the question.

“The impression one gains is not so much that stupidity is a congenital defect, but that, under certain circumstances, people are made stupid or that they allow this to happen to them. We note further that people who have isolated themselves from others or who live in solitude manifest this defect less frequently than individuals or groups of people inclined or condemned to sociability. And so it would seem that stupidity is perhaps less a psychological than a sociological problem.”  

Sadly, stupidity walks hand-in-hand with sociability. However, I suspect the truth is that intellectually self-sufficient people, regardless of whether they are sociable, are resistant to stupidity — while the stupid actively seek affirmation for their beliefs by hanging out with other stupid people.

Bonhoeffer goes on to describe the stupid person.

“The fact that the stupid person is often stubborn must not blind us to the fact that he is not independent. In conversation with him, one virtually feels that one is dealing not at all with a person, but with slogans, catchwords and the like that have taken possession of him. He is under a spell, blinded, misused, and abused in his very being. Having thus become a mindless tool, the stupid person will also be capable of any evil and at the same time incapable of seeing that it is evil.”    

One characteristic of MAGAs on social media is that they never express an original thought. Every argument they advance is someone else's. And almost invariably, they express themselves in memes. They also love chain emails disseminating complete bullshit —  the more lurid, the better.

Left to their own devices, these stupid people would be irritating. But seduced by a charismatic leader, they coalesce into a destabilizing force eager to promote the cult. And avid to be tools of the autocrat.

“He is under a spell, blinded, misused, and abused in his very being. Having thus become a mindless tool, the stupid person will also be capable of any evil and at the same time incapable of seeing that it is evil. This is where the danger of diabolical misuse lurks, for it is this that can once and for all destroy human beings.  

The autocrat is aware of this valuable and necessary asset.

“Upon closer observation, it becomes apparent that every strong upsurge of power in the public sphere, be it of a political or of a religious nature, infects a large part of humankind with stupidity.”

Bonhoeffer then offered the cold comfort that, while there is an end to stupidity, it comes at a high cost. And unfortunately, there is no other way to achieve that end.

“Yet at this very point it becomes quite clear that only an act of liberation, not instruction, can overcome stupidity. Here we must come to terms with the fact that in most cases a genuine internal liberation becomes possible only when external liberation has preceded it. Until then we must abandon all attempts to convince the stupid person.”

In Germany’s case the “act of liberation” was the country's destruction as it lost WWII. Who knows what will cause the MAGAs to come to their senses? With luck, an energized Gen Z will push an aging reactionary mob to the sidelines. With no luck, it will be the civil war Trump and his dead-enders are fomenting.

Or the end could be decades away as the Republicans at the state and federal levels shred democratic norms like ballot access, streamlined registration, early and mail-in voting, ballot measures, and representative districts while armed Brown Shirts patrol polling stations — reducing America to a Soviet-style shithole.

On the last, although I like to be right, I would prefer circumstances to prove me guilty of hyperbole and just plain wrong. Fingers crossed.



Sunday, July 30, 2023

Trump issues bizarre video threatening to 'do things to you that have never been done before'

no image description available

Republished by:

Blue Country Gazette Blog

Rim Country Gazette Blog

What. The actual. Fuck.
 
Probably not great news that Donald Trump is putting horrifying supervillain stuff like this on his TruthSocial account now.

In a video, a voice that sounds like Donald Trump (but may in fact be an AI-generated interpretation of an angry, revenge-seeking bean burrito) says, "If you fuck around with us, if you do something bad to us, we are going to do things to you that have never been done before."

What? Like ... what?

You're going to put me on a cruise ship? You're going to take me to the Smithsonian? You're going to read me the complete written works of Mike Huckabee? What the hell are you even going on about?

I'm still holding out hope for the bean burrito explanation, because it's difficult to believe that Donald Trump would issue such an incredibly lame-ass threat and take credit for it, and even promote it, when it sounds like Donald was just wingin' it and thought he was narrating a snuff film.

But it's got to be Trump, because nobody else would issue a lame-ass threat anywhere near as lame-ass as "going to do things to you that have never been done before." That's one of his signature turns of phrase, one of the things he burps when he can't think of any actual examples and has to fill space. You know, like, "Frederick Douglass is an example of somebody who’s done an amazing job and is being recognized more and more, I notice," which was a for-real thing this clown-faced seditionist actually piped up with inside the damn White House, resulting in days of analysis in which the press tried to figure out whether Donald knew who Frederick Douglass was and that he’s been dead since 1891.

"... going to do things to you that have never been done before?" That's your threat? What, you're going to give me a coupon for a store that doesn't exist anymore? You're going to mail me a live rabbit? You're going to paint an oil painting of me stabbing Orson Welles with a long-expired vanilla creme wafer? Do you know how little using the word "things" narrows it down? If you're going to threaten your enemies, Donald, you need to expend more effort than promising to do "things" while an electric organ vomits out its intestines in the background.

And since when do alleged presidential candidates put out videos of themselves in grainy black and white, paired with threatening music and ominous warnings of what's gonna happen if you elect them?

Do you not even understand which side of your own campaign you're supposed to be on? Do you think you're running to be Darth Vader? A lazy, bored Darth Vader slouching at the base of a dying foghorn, trying to threaten Princess Leia but unwilling to make even the smallest effort to think up what threat to use?

Are you going to hurt me? Are you going to give me a million dollars? Are you going to give me a million dollars, then send me a nasty note reminding me that aha, I'll have to pay state and federal taxes on it?

Is the threat supposed to be, "If you fuck around with me, I will make you listen to this tortured robotic cow noise"? Is it, "If you do something bad to us, I will make this extended atonal fart the new national anthem"?

Dude, what the hell you doin' over there?

You already tried to overthrow the whole U.S. government because you were having a whiny poopy baby tantrum over losing an election. What grainy black-and-white thing are you trying to suggest you're going to do that's worse than whiny baby treason?

Are you going to show up on my porch one morning with your face painted orange, and tell me you're a pumpkin? Are you going to try to make me care about pickleball? All of this is way, way too abstract for your enemies to give a flying damn about. It just makes you look like a man who enjoys simulated dinosaur sex noises.

Try harder or go home, you half-assed national traitor. You're not running to be the new Hannibal Lecter, you stubby-thumbed mirror-humper. There are actual Kennedys out there scarier than you, you pathetic burnt-out bulb in a bathroom chandelier.



Friday, July 28, 2023

Go ahead and impeach Biden, House Republicans. See you in 2024

By Kerry Eleveld for Daily Kos

Daily Kos Staff

RSS

REPUBLISHED TO:

Blue Country Gazette Blog

Rim Country Gazette Blog

Earlier this week, Fox News congressional correspondent Chad Pergram sent out a short thread of illuminating tweets framed as a "User’s Manual To Where We Stand With Possible 'Impeachments' in the House."

It was indeed helpful, since House Republicans are currently plotting several of them. Pergram’s thread noted that the push to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas over something nebulous was “furthest along,” according to a senior House Republican source. "Although that doesn’t mean that it’s THAT far along," Pergram added. In other words, it's not like the GOP caucus has nailed down real evidence in support of actionable wrongdoing yet.

But House Republicans are also weighing impeaching Attorney General Merrick Garland or maybe even President Joe Biden, after House Speaker Kevin McCarthy signaled an openness to it in a Fox News interview on Monday night. McCarthy's public flirtation with the topic was framed to Pergram by a Republican source as "high-level 'trial balloons.'"

"The reason is that McCarthy wants to get a sense of what GOPers want to do," Pergram explained. "And most importantly, where the votes may lie for impeaching anyone."

Anyone? Biden, Garland, Mayorkas—who knows? Maybe they should flip a coin; play rock, paper, scissors; or get out the Magic 8 Ball.

Back in the day, lawmakers used to investigate these things first, but that's so last Congress. Today’s House Republicans just move on to the vote-counting and figure they'll hash out a rationale later.

Anyhow, the caucus must have been hot on targeting the president because by Tuesday, McCarthy was reportedly "moving closer" to opening an impeachment inquiry.

On the one hand, Republicans say they're "sitting on" loads of evidence. On the other hand, they are justifying an inquiry as a way to obtain information they've been blocked from getting. Which is it, geniuses?  Pick a lane.

At least some Republicans are trying to pump the brakes on playing a completely absurd impeachment card as the country gears up for the 2024 presidential cycle.

“It’s a good idea to go to the inquiry stage,” former GOP House Speaker Newt Gingrich told The Washington Post. But he cautioned that “impeachment itself is a terrible idea.”

Gingrich, who helped lead the impeachment crusade against President Bill Clinton in 1998, stepped down immediately after the Republican House suffered huge losses in the midterm elections.

Still, Gingrich was essentially clearing the way for McCarthy to appease the Republican extremists who own his speaker’s gavel while cautioning him against an actual impeachment proceeding. Gingrich knows a thing or two about impeachment fallout.

Meanwhile, several House Republicans beelined to reporters to downplay McCarthy's escalation. The Biden White House happily highlighted the discord within the GOP caucus in a statement to The Hill.

  • Rep. Ken Buck of Colorado called McCarthy's tactics "impeachment theater."

  • Rep. Richard Hudson of North Carolina told reporters, "no one is seriously talking about impeachment."

  • Rep. Tony Gonzalez of Texas offered that voters in his district are concerned about "real issues," like inflation (which is actually dropping) and the border (where crossings have actually plummeted).

“The American people want their leaders in Congress to spend their time working with the President on important issues like continuing to lower costs, create good-paying jobs, and strengthen health care,” said the White House statement, calling Republican machinations "baseless stunts."

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell also weighed in Wednesday, calling impeachment "not good for the country" while also drawing a false equivalency between House Republicans and the two Democratic impeachments of Donald Trump.

Those impeachment proceedings involved tangible evidence of high crimes and misdemeanors. Then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi actually put off impeachment for as long as humanly possible because she knew it would be a divisive proceeding that could blow up in Democrats' faces. Her hand was finally forced in September 2019 by the whistleblower account of Trump's attempt to extort Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. And then Trump actually plotted a blood-thirsty coup attempt on Jan. 6, 2021, to disrupt certification of the 2020 election and end the peaceful transfer of power. So that was that.

But keep this in mind: Both of Trump's impeachments were rooted in hard evidence—like the transcript of Trump's 'perfect phone call' with Zelenskyy, while the Jan. 6 insurrection played out live on TV screens across the country. The horror of that day and Trump's role in it was then vividly recreated by the Jan. 6 committee, arguably the most theatrically effective congressional investigation in decades. In fact, without the Jan. 6 hearings, special counsel Jack Smith likely wouldn't be preparing to drop a criminal indictment on the matter any day now.

In stark contrast to Pelosi’s reticence, House Republicans are still chasing their tails on a mystery scandal with supposed mounds of evidence—if only they had the subpoena power to access it.

As White House spokesperson Ian Sams noted on Tuesday of the House GOP's mystifying predicament, "This is literally nonsensical."

Go on with that impeachment, Republicans. The already deluded GOP base will eat it up, but the rest of the country will weigh in at the ballot box next year. See you there.



Thursday, July 27, 2023

Conservative Steve Deace cries bitter tears after Trump allies admit election lies: 'It was all BS'

Story by Travis Gettys • 4h ago
Raw Story

Conservative broadcaster Steve Deace complained bitterly that Donald Trump's allies admitted to lies about the election that he helped spread.

The BlazeTV host initially opposed Trump in 2016 and then claimed to leave the Republican Party after his first choice, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), called for unity behind the reality TV star-turned GOP standard bearer, but by 2020 he was promoting Trump's election lies and raising money for the "Stop the Steal" movement -- much to his belated chagrin.

"We are going to the mattresses for these people, we are offering them more accommodations, more chances, than we'd offer our own family members, for goodness sake," Deace said, "and for what? For Rudy Giuliani to go down to Georgia and admit that he lied? Have Jason Miller tell the Jan. 6 commission, 'Yeah, we all knew it was BS?' What is this?

"Some of you don't like it when I use the cult word. When you like being treated like a schmuck, and ask for more, that is a cult. 'I'm the mark, I'm the sucker, I want to be such and I resent the person who tries to get me out of that.' Those are marks of groupthink, frankly."

"How many people in this audience sent money to 'Stop the Steal' three years ago?" Deace continued. "How many shows did I waste your time talking about this three years ago? How many? I still have not recovered. Between election fraud and COVID, I probably have the lowest Facebook following of any major show in this industry. I will routinely post things on Facebook and get, like, two or three comments. It's, like, Facebook is like, 'We won't ban you because you'll whine about it and generate a bunch of publicity, so we'll just make it so no one sees your material at all."

"Why?" he added. "Because I went to the mattresses on COVID and the election fraud issue, only to have Rudy Giuliani say, 'Yeah, I was lying,' and Jason Miller say, 'Oh, we knew it was all BS.'"


"
I went to the mattresses on COVID and the election fraud issue, only to have Rudy Giuliani say, 'Yeah, I was lying,' and Jason Miller say, 'Oh, we knew it was all BS.'" - Conservative broadcaster Steve Deace

Wednesday, July 26, 2023

'Incandescently stupid': Ex-DHS official says Trump needed 'highly classified' memos dumbed down

Story by Brandon Gage • Tuesday, 7-26-23 2:15 PM
Alternet

Former United States Department of Homeland Security Chief of Staff Miles Taylor recalled to Meidas Touch podcast host Brett Meiselas on Tuesday that he had to drastically dumb down national security reports to ensure that ex-President Donald Trump could interpret them.

"This fifty-page memo that we would normally give to any other president about what his options are is something Trump literally can't read. The man doesn't read. We've gotta boil this down into a one-pager in his voice," Taylor said.

"And so I had to write this incandescently stupid memo called something like, 'Afghanistan, How to Put America First and Win.' And then bullet by bullet, I summed up this highly classified memo into Trump's sort of bombastic language because it was the only way he was gonna understand," Taylor continued. 

"I mean, I literally said in there, 'You know, if we leave Afghanistan too fast, the terrorists will call us losers. But if we wanna be seen as winners, we need to make sure the Afghan forces have the strength to push back against these criminals.' I mean, it was that dumb and that's how you had to talk to him."

Sunday, July 23, 2023

Finally, the Trump Case We've Been Waiting For

Finally, the Trump Case We've Been Waiting For  The failure to answer Trump's brazen acts with a decisive rebuke has only empowered the former president. (photo: Hannah Beier/Washington Post)

 But, with 2024 looming, is it already too late?


Susan B. Glasser / The New Yorker 

 

One word came to mind when I heard the news this week that Donald Trump had received a target letter from the Justice Department special prosecutor Jack Smith, indicating that an indictment is likely of the former President on charges connected with his effort to overturn the 2020 election and remain in power: Finally. This, in the end, is the heart of the matter, a long-delayed reckoning with an offense against the constitutional system so great that it is without historic precedent—no President before Trump ever did such a thing.

Trump received the target letter on Sunday, and revealed it in one of his trademark hysterical social-media posts on Tuesday: “HORRIFYING NEWS!” Over the next couple of days, there were still more legal setbacks. In Florida, a Trump-appointed federal judge overseeing Smith’s other criminal case against the former President—for illegally holding on to top-secret documents—appeared deeply skeptical of Trump’s argument that she should delay a trial indefinitely since he is running for President. In Georgia, the state’s Supreme Court ruled against Trump’s motion to block the Fulton County district attorney, Fani T. Willis, from prosecuting him for his efforts to pressure officials to overturn his 2020 defeat in the state; criminal charges could result in the coming weeks. In New York, meanwhile, a judge said that Trump could not switch the venue of his Manhattan criminal trial for allegedly paying hush money to silence a former porn star with whom he had an affair. Trump is also facing two more civil lawsuits in New York, both of which could go to trial next year. America’s new political reality, in short, is: Donald Trump, Full-Time Defendant.

And yet Republicans remain in such thrall to their Orange Jesus—the honorific that Party apostate Liz Cheney so memorably quoted one of his acolytes calling him during last summer’s January 6th hearings—that, with each new legal woe, his prospects of winning the 2024 G.O.P. nomination keep going up. Few if any of these cases are likely to be fully resolved before the start of next year’s Republican primaries. Trump’s campaign is now explicitly a race not just to retake the Oval Office but to save himself from criminal conviction. This convergence of campaign and courtroom is, as the former Republican National Committee counsel Benjamin Ginsberg said this week, “a toxic mix unprecedented in the American experiment.” Something’s gotta give.

The apparently impending Smith indictment is not like all the other cases. In theory, it will force the question that has cursed the country since the evening of November 3, 2020, when Trump chose to claim victory in an election he had lost: What to do about a President who will do anything to stay in power, even unleash a violent mob of his supporters on the U.S. Capitol? Isn’t that illegal? How can it not be?

For two and a half years, the failure to answer Trump’s brazen acts with a decisive rebuke has only empowered the former President, enabling him to regain political strength within his party and force its nominal leaders to once again acknowledge his hold over their voters. Consider Mitch McConnell, who is the closest thing the current G.O.P. leadership has to an avowed enemy of the ex-President. Minutes after Trump was acquitted by the Senate in his second impeachment trial, he gave a blistering speech about the ex-President’s culpability in the events of January 6th. McConnell had not voted for conviction but, he insisted, only because of his objection to the process of impeaching a President who was no longer in office. “There is no question that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of that day,” McConnell said. “The people who stormed this building believed they were acting on the wishes and instructions of their President. And their having that belief was a foreseeable consequence of the growing crescendo of false statements, conspiracy theories, and reckless hyperbole which the defeated President kept shouting into the largest megaphone on planet Earth.” The Senate Republican leader all but called for the Justice Department to do what his Senate would not. “President Trump is still liable for everything he did while he was in office,” McConnell said. “Didn’t get away with anything. Yet.”

But this week, when liability at last seemed imminent, McConnell said nothing at all. “I’m not going to comment on the various candidates for the Presidency,” he lamely told reporters. In the House, Speaker Kevin McCarthy was even worse. In 2021, he had directly blamed Trump for the attack on the Capitol. “Nobody can defend that, and nobody should defend it,” he said. This week, though, he attacked the Justice Department for indicting Trump in a case that has not been filed yet. It was, he said, an effort to “weaponize government to go after their No. 1 opponent.” According to Politico, the Speaker promised Trump that he would hold a House vote to “expunge” the two House impeachments against him—never mind that no one even knows whether such a thing is constitutionally possible. “I don’t see how he could be found criminally responsible,” McCarthy said. “What criminal activity did he do? He told people to be peaceful.”

Republicans used to revel every four years in their self-proclaimed status as the party of “law and order.” Now they follow Trump into attacks on federal prosecutors, on the Justice Department, on the F.B.I. It’s anyone’s guess how far down this road McCarthy may be willing to go, as the former President combines his legal defense with a political campaign of vengeance, retribution, and personal survival. It was surreal to see pictures of the Speaker as Joe Biden’s guest at the annual White House congressional picnic this week, grinning and chomping on an ice-cream bar, even as he seemed all too willing to light the place on fire if that’s what his restive pro-Trump majority were to demand.

The prospect of Trump returning to the White House is an existential one for American democracy, a political test from which there is no escaping. If this wasn’t clear before, it must be now. A reëlected Trump would be a President subject to no constraints at all—having twice dodged congressional impeachment, and either beaten back the Justice Department and the courts or delayed so long that he could seek to use his regained executive powers to nullify the cases against him. Trump, in his ever-more-apocalyptic rhetoric surrounding his effort to retake the White House, has taken to calling his 2024 race “the final battle.” I have increasingly come to believe that he is correct.

Given the stakes, there’s much to anticipate about what Smith’s latest case against Trump might look like. According to the Times, his target letter indicated that Trump could be prosecuted under three criminal statutes: conspiracy to defraud the government, obstruction of an official proceeding, and even a law enacted after the Civil War to give federal agents a means of prosecuting Southern white supremacists, including Ku Klux Klan members who resorted to terrorism to prevent newly freed Blacks from voting.

But knowing what he will be charged with does not mean there is nothing left to learn about this unprecedented plot against America. For that, we must wait for the indictment: Will there be new details showing that it was the President himself who orchestrated the conspiracy to overturn election results in battleground states? New examples of Trump pressuring officials or government agencies? Damning evidence in his own words that he knew he had lost the election and proceeded anyway? Will there be a turncoat—Mark Meadows, perhaps?—to provide revelations from inside Trump’s fevered quest to stay in office after the voters had spoken? I hope and expect so after more than two and a half years of waiting. And yet somehow those questions still seem subordinate to the one that the indictment will not and cannot answer: Did it come too late?

Finally cornered and trapped, the Fat Don is about to face not one, not two, not three, but four juries. 

Saturday, July 22, 2023

When reality morphs from personal to political

"...slavery might be profitable or politically expedient, but it was not moral. (Lincoln) had to choose the future of America."

By George Templeton

Gazette Blog Columnist

Becoming Brain Synchronized, 1322
Internet gossip is emotional, but it isn’t you. You interpret your engagements. You manufacture the meaning of their symbols. Even icons like the cross have changed their meaning.

The Symbolic Us
We elect our government. Our happiness requires the “right” choices. Our laws give us moral guidance.

Supreme Court Judges, policemen, and leaders are more than themselves. They represent principle, ethos, and tradition. We build tomorrow on yesterday. Like a tree that grows from a seed to eventually produce fruit, we expect to harvest a tasty delight.

Yesterday we respected our honest leaders because they educated us instead of misrepresenting our choices. Leaders took a position and stood by it even if it meant their job loss. They knew that they had more than a duty. They had an obligation to their authentic selves. The good of the American people was most important.

If we lost the election, there would be another and there would be additional facts to base our decisions on. We would be the rational deciders. We would come together, for a while, to support our leader. We can understand the social nature of democracy only by having imagination and empathy.

Some of us are unaware of how they are socially shaped. Do they know the difference between not knowing and not caring? Are they acting for a purpose or with a purpose? Knowing what we have done in life is not nearly as important as seeing what we should have done.

Our Constitution made a nation. It served the purposes outlined in the Declaration of Independence. How could collective unity avoid dictatorship?

There comes a time in leadership when you realize that you are responsible for everything but have authority over nothing. Like Gary Cooper in the 1952 movie “High Noon” you have no higher authority to exculpate you. Like President Lincoln, slavery might be profitable or politically expedient, but it was not moral. He had to choose the future of America.

Religious fundamentalists say, “Just believe” thus ignoring the ridiculous. But they are right. Belief does matter, as long as it recognizes that there is more than one’s self in the universe, as long as it recognizes that this self is responsible. It does change things. And so, you may not agree that you can make a difference but believing does make a big difference, especially when reality has morphed from the personal to the
political.

Emotional Vision
In America, the informed democratic electorate is more adaptive than rational. Leaders ignore their symbolic duty. Things will change, but do we first need to tear them apart? If we investigate our motives we will find that emotion helps us make better decisions.

We have decided long before we even realize it. We don’t consult Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason before acting, even when we think we have.

We live in an illusion. We don’t exactly remember. Our evolutionary mental scaffolding knows that the pieces have to fit, and so we construct our personal story around the remaining fading guideposts in our brain.

We locate “real space” in a frame of reference (x, y, z, t …). Our “world space’ is where our friends meet (social media). It is as much mental as physical, mindful as concrete, and subjective as objective. We cannot leave our engagements behind.

Can You See?
We find that people suffering from Wernicke’s Aphasia speak normally but cannot comprehend what is said to them. People with Broca’s Aphasia understand spoken language but cannot produce it. But do things have to be black or white, all or none?

Psychology studies find that there can be vision without sight. Although a subject claims to see nothing, they later accurately identify what they were shown. We communicate with language and images, but we gain subconscious information about things that we cannot see. We are like scientists, trying to see that which cannot be seen. Our brains interpret senses which we are unaware of.

Your Mind Controls Your Body, but Can You Train Your Brain?

Are you a mind or are you a body? These were separate things according to Descartes. Your mind wills your leg to move. Can the physical alter the mind?

Cognitive behavioral therapy asserts that there are techniques for retraining your brain. They include interventions for smoking, weight management, and drug abuse, coping with stress, depression, anger, and fear.

Our reality changes us genetically. That is how we pass “us” on to future generations. PTSD and COVID will have long-term consequences. Now studies are showing that traumatic experiences can cause immediate genetic changes in the next generation. It does not take millions of years.


Brain Metaphors

A metaphor is something other than the literal truth.

Absolute belief is the opposite of creativity. It leads to a lack of flexibility and imagination. Trial and error, subject to consciousness, leads to intuition. Overthinking kills the message.

It is like playing the trumpet. First, you have to learn some rules, build muscles, and learn reflexes. After that, it is about letting go. If you have to think about it, you are not communicating.

Metaphors bridge the gap between reason and logic, between the ridiculous and the rational, between the actor and the audience, between the affective and cognitive, between the subjective and objective, and between the spiritual and secular. This is their power.

The philosopher, Wittgenstein explained that all meaning is social, contextual, and grounded in culture. It isn’t mathematical or computable.

Words can have many meanings. They are also part of a story. Many ways can take us from point A to point B. Neurology calls these threads neurons and synapses. Our brains are "meaning-making" machines.

Today’s interconnected world requires more than our personal feelings. The basis for truth is boring and often complex.

Measuring Love
N.C. Barford wrote a book about precision, error, and truth in 1967. The title implies that there is something different about these three. The book was about making measurements, but the truth can be hard to grasp.

We can’t get our fears and dreams out of our experiences. Feelings have strong qualitative content. We make them concrete although they cannot be measured and quantified.

How accurate is your love? Does it have an external standard like the meter and kilogram? We cannot measure love directly. At best, we have only proxies. It remains mysterious.

Twentieth-century philosophers like Heidegger wrestled with the problem of human consciousness seeming to change the things we come in contact with. Our engagement molests the very thing that we are trying to measure.

Brain Washed or Brain Synchronized
The Communist Party knows how to brainwash. They call it vocational rehabilitation.

Brain synchronization is much more powerful. It is like a metaphor because we bring ourselves to it. It has no dominant over-arching belief.  Perhaps our desire to be praiseworthy instead of deplorable has something to do with it.

Meshed gears in a machine allow for the transmission of power. They have to “fit” for the machine (MAGA) to operate. Will the next tooth to attempt engagement jam the transmission? We don’t know. Our synchronized brains are like this.

Multiple brain scanning techniques reveal that our brains are joined together socially. They are not independent.

Scientists found that the geometric pattern of neuron firing is drastically different between transmitters (politicians) and receivers (us).

The measure of successful synchronization is a high correlation between our symphonies of brain waves. Waves have amplitude, timing, and shape (harmonic content). When people think similarly, their brain waves are nearly identical.

A political rally can indoctrinate thousands of people. Not all people synchronize, but those that do become as fixed and permanent as the mountains. But educators cannot teach synchronization. There are far too many interacting variables for that.

This is the neurology of synchronized brains. It appears on the “like button”, in entertainment news, in confirmation bias and with the moral individual living inside an immoral collective.

Friday, July 21, 2023

Fox News leads redneck freakout over "Barbie"

no image description available  Call someone who cares.

Did you have “Republicans freak out over the gender politics of the Barbie movie” on your 2023 bingo card? I, for one, did not—yet here we are. The movie hasn’t even been released yet (it "came out" today, July 21), but Fox News is leading the charge against it, giving a host of right-wing influencer types the space to whine that, as one chyron predictably put it, the “Barbie movie goes woke.”

According to one of its stars, Simu Liu, “I’m so glad that this movie exists because I think it puts the final nail in the coffin of that very heteronormative idea of what gender is, and what is or is not gendered.” Writer and activist Charlotte Clymer tweeted a compelling review of the movie, writing that it “feels like an especially potent trojan horse, beckoning us with well-earned laughter into a larger conversation on gender and how Barbie—the defining cultural symbol of high femme expression—has shaped that discourse over the past six decades.” So you can begin to see the problem from the right-wing culture warriors’ point of view.

In the words of one Christian movie review site gleefully quoted by Fox News, ”The new BARBIE movie forgets its core audience of families and children while catering to nostalgic adults and pushing lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender character stories. Furthermore, the movie was poorly made with multiple premises, losing even the most die-hard fans.” (News flash: Nostalgic adults can be parents who make decisions about their family’s movie-watching habits.)

The movie’s undermining of Barbie’s traditional place in the gender canon includes the title character’s feet suddenly going flat rather than maintaining her eternal high-heeled stance, experiencing objectification by men for the first time as she leaves Barbie world for the real world, and Ken becoming what Clymer describes as “something of a Jordan Peterson guru to the other Kens.” All of these are potent critiques of gender representation in Barbie—a brand long loathed by many feminists—and could be the targets of right-wing ire. Indeed, Ginger Gaetz, wife of Rep. Matt Gaetz, is trying to grow her social media profile on the basis of the movie, despite the fact that she and Matt attended and eagerly posed for pictures at the premiere.

“I'd recommend sticking to getting outfit inspiration and skipping the theater,” she tweeted. That’s because “[t]he Barbie I grew up with was a representation of limitless possibilities, embracing diverse careers and feminine empowerment,” but “[t]he 2023 Barbie movie, unfortunately, neglects to address any notion of faith or family, and tries to normalize the idea that men and women can't collaborate positively (yuck).” Additionally, there’s “[d]isappointingly low T from Ken.”

Did anyone connect Barbie to faith or family to begin with? Barbie has had a long list of careers. She’s been a cowgirl, a wild animal trainer, a race car driver, a bowler, a boxer, an aerobics instructor, a computer engineer, an architect, a campaign fundraiser, a U.S. president, a fashion trend forecaster, and a film director. She has taught subjects from yoga to Spanish to sign language. She has occupied a number of roles in the military. She has owned small businesses including a farmers market stall and a fashion boutique, as well as working in almost any kind of store you can think of. 

She has not, however, been a minister in any of her incarnations—and indeed, if she had been, it would have alienated those Christians who do not believe it is biblically appropriate for women to be ministers. Perhaps Ginger Gaetz and her ilk imagined one of the musician Barbies as a church musician.

And family? Barbie is not a particularly maternal figure. Barbie and Ken are not married. They may have from time to time shared a Dreamhouse, but that was living in sin. It may be easy for someone married to Matt Gaetz to get confused about what “faith and family” is supposed to look like, but while Barbie has long been a hyper-femme icon, the official narrative about her coming from Mattel has never been that.

Gaetz either missed the thing she was supposed to be most upset about or wasn’t quite willing to go there. Because a significant part of the right-wing freakout centers around one single character, a doctor Barbie played by trans actress Hari Nef. As that Christian movie review site said, the movie “push[es] lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender character stories.” The Federalist’s Peachy Keenan, author of “Domestic Extremist: A Practical Guide to Winning the Culture War,” wrote at Revolver, the movie is “the slickest, most visually appealing and therefore most insidious packaging of feminist cliche and trans grooming” that she had ever seen, and said on Fox News, “I found out last week, they somehow didn’t let anyone know this with the marketing campaign, that one of Barbie’s main three sidekicks is—surprise surprise—a man. I mean, is nothing sacred?” She added, “I don’t really know what they were thinking, they just gave Barbie the Bud Light treatment.”

No, the movie happened to cast Hari Nef. It’s the bigots who want to give the movie “the Bud Light treatment” by unleashing an avalanche of hate on any company that offers even a glancing positive representation of a trans person.

Even without a trans actress playing a Barbie, the culture warriors of the right probably would have had at least a minor freakout over the movie. Ginger Gaetz laid out some of the arguments that would have been used, as silly as they are. (Has Ken ever seemed especially “high T” to you?) After all, it’s the slow news month of July. Teachers aren’t in the classroom to present targets for attack. But the movie’s use of a trans actress in the hallowed feminine role of Barbie guaranteed that the temper tantrum would be loud and sustained. There is a right-wing project afoot to drive trans people from public life, to make their existence unspeakable—in the sense that it cannot be mentioned, and in the sense that the miseries inflicted upon them would be impossible to convey in words.

"The movie’s use of a trans actress in the hallowed feminine role of Barbie guaranteed that the temper tantrum would be loud and sustained."

Thursday, July 20, 2023

Exit Florida: Disney dough rises in California

Desantis_agape.jpg
Photo of Ron DeSantis published in May Forbes report chronicling his "disastrous" presidential campaign launch on Twitter. Photo source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/danidiplacido/2023/05/25/here-are-the-best-memes-from-twitters-ron-desantis-fiasco/?sh=6030c6db2836

By cfordlaw

Community

RSS

PUBLISHED TO: 

Blue Country Gazette Blog

Rim Country Gazette Blog

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’s puny attempts to punish the Walt Disney Company for opposing his bigotry agenda, which includes “don’t say gay legislation that banned discussing sexual orientation or gender identity in schools, continue to blow up in his face, as Disney redirects its economic might to California.

It has been well-reported that immigrants are fleeing Florida to escape the harsh, anti-immigrant policies DeSantis recently enacted as part of his so-called war on woke (a term he says opponents cannot define and he cannot define correctly), leaving farmers and builders to scramble for workers. Now, adding to Florida’s economic woes,the ill wind of Disney’s war with Ron DeSantis over LGBTQ+ rights appears to be blowing some magic pixie dust towards California as the theme park giant reins back its investment in Florida and ramps up spending in the Golden state.

On its way out of Florida, Disney not only canceled a $1B office-campus project that would have added 2,000 jobs to central Florida, but it also unveiled plans to shutter a “Star Wars-themed luxury hotel” it had opened in Orlando just last year. Explaining these changes in plans, Disney representatives have referred to DeSantis as “anti-business” and cited “changing business conditions” in Florida. A business analyst told the Guardian

“DeSantis has done lasting harm to Disney’s investments in Florida…. I’m in touch with a lot of CEOs who are looking at those issues right now and thinking, ‘Where should I invest? What’s best for the long run?’”

Disney’s answer: California, which now will add some Disney dinero to its world-beating economy. The company 

is all in on Disneyland Forward, an ambitious rolling program of growth at its two Anaheim theme parks. The company projects the program will generate $253m annually and more than 2,200 new jobs.

After receiving a briefing on Disney’s plan to invest in its Southern California properties “for decades to come,” California governor Gavin Newsom, in a prepared statement, said

“In California, we don’t just tolerate our diversity – we celebrate it and all the ways it makes us stronger.”

Newsom added, 

“Our inclusivity and acceptance attract new talent and ideas that drive our economic growth and make California a hotspot for world-leading companies to grow and prosper.”

Earlier this year Newsom mocked DeSantis after Disney created a loophole that thwarted DeSantis’s attempt to take control of Disney land in Florida. "I guess there's a new sheriff in town," Newsom told a business publication, his comment an ironic reference to DeSantis’s like pronouncement when he initiated his failed attempt to strip Disney of self-governing powers. “It’s Mickey Mouse, back on top.”

If California were a country, its 2022 GDP of $3.6T would produce the world’s fifth largest economy, ahead of India, France and the U.K. and behind only the U.S., China, Japan and Germany, and nearly twice the size of the economy of Canada, which has a similar-size population.

...at least in Blue States they do.

Wednesday, July 19, 2023

Who would you rather live next to? The xenophobe, or the brave immigrant?

no image description available
People gathered at the Place de la Republique in Paris on June 22, 2023 in memory of the migrants who died off the Greek coast.

By Kos for Daily Kos

Daily Kos Staff 

RSS

As a society, we’ve spent decades arguing the morality of immigration, the value of asylum, the economic impacts, and the racism and fear of “replacement” that drives much of the anti-immigrant campaign. Republicans in the U.S. have endlessly demonized immigrants south of the border, culminating with Donald Trump’s overt racism. Similarly in Europe, far-right white supremacist parties are gaining popular support by railing against African and Middle Eastern immigrants.

Yet this simple tweet and photo really captured the essence of the debate: 

I’d rather live next door to someone who crossed the oceans with a child to escape death and violence than a citizen who wouldn’t cross the street to help a foreigner.

It says something that liberals and conservatives, no matter where in the world, would likely answer this question differently.

Part of that debate is the othering of those desperate immigrants, painting them as criminals or opportunists—malicious actors hoping to take advantage of the hospitality of others to somehow harm their new country.

The data is clear that immigration bolsters host country economies. Rather than rehash the numbers, one only needs to point to Florida, where Gov. Ron DeSantis’ radical election-season anti-immigrant law is decimating the state’s agricultural sector. A couple of weeks ago, The Wall Street Journal painted a bleak picture for both agricultural and construction employers in the state:

“The employee who wants to work on the farm is not available anymore,” said Hitesh Kotecha, owner of a produce packaging facility in South Florida who leases land to farmers. “How are we going to run the farms?”

In Miami’s booming construction market, developers, construction companies, and construction workers say the change happened as soon as DeSantis signed the legislation this spring. Workers at several construction sites in South Florida say a quarter to half of their teams are gone, exacerbating an already challenging labor shortage across the industry.

Ironically, the construction and agricultural sectors are heavily Republican, as is rural farm country. The cognitive dissonance leads to this farmer despairing over the law, but stressing that he thinks Trump is “the best president in my lifetime” and DeSantis “is the greatest governor.”

Hating on immigrants is fun and easy for these demagogues as long as they reap the political rewards, giving the impression of “doing something” as their own anti-government rhetoric and actions decimate their core base in rural America. The same dynamics play out in Europe, where such rhetoric takes hold in economically distressed regions like eastern Germany. It was the key driver for the United Kingdom’s disastrous Brexit push to leave the European Union in order to better control its border against undesirable outsiders.

Yet that tweet paints a different picture of the issue.

People don’t leave their homes on a lark. They don’t say goodbye to everything they know, the people they love, and the communities they belong to for funsies. They don’t get on rickety boats to cross the Mediterranean, like the one that recently sank and killed over 600 Pakistani, Egyptian, Palestinian, and Syrian migrants, simply because they want a higher-paying gig. It is always an act of desperation.

Kamiran Ahmad, a Syrian teenager, a month shy of his 18th birthday, had arrived in Tobruk, Libya, with hopes for a new life. He had worked with his father, a tailor, after school. His parents sold land to pay smugglers to take him to Italy, praying that he would make it to Germany to study, work and maybe send some money home [...]

They were part of a group of 11 young men and boys from Kobani, a mainly Kurdish city in Syria devastated by more than decade of war. The group stayed in dingy, rented rooms in Beirut, Lebanon, then flew to Egypt and on to Libya.

The youngest, Waleed Mohammad Qasem, 14, wanted to be a doctor. When he heard that his uncle Mohammad Fawzi Sheikhi was going to Europe, he begged to go. On the flight to Egypt, the two smiled for a selfie [...]

Waleed Mohammad Qasem, the 14-year-old who wanted to be a doctor, drowned. So did his uncle, who had posed with him for a selfie [...]

Near the end, Kamiran Ahmad, the teenager who had hoped to study in Germany, turned to his cousin Roghaayan. From the migrant center in Greece, the older cousin remembered his words: “Didn’t I tell you we were going to die? Didn’t I tell you we were already dead?”

Both went into the water. Kamiran’s body has not been recovered.

The people making these trips are just as desperate as the Latin American immigrants who brave the gauntlet of thieves and rapists, a dangerous river, and a blistering hot desert on the American side full of even more bandits, plus right-wing militia nutbags. Parents will send their children into danger because gang and drug violence at home is even more dangerous.

So let’s ask that question again: Who would you rather live next to? The people who risk everything to come work, to find a better life and send money to their families back home, or those who would steal water left for migrants in the desert, point guns at them, and vilify them for their desperation?

We can’t choose where we’re born; it’s all luck and happenstance. But we can choose how to behave toward those who didn’t start their lives with all the advantages.

...with immigrants.