Saturday, December 12, 2020

 Sophistry

noun, plural soph·ist·ries.

  1. a subtle, tricky, superficially plausible, but generally fallacious method of reasoning.
  2. a false argument; sophism.

I love words that specifically and accurately spell out a concept that would otherwise take a few words or sentences to explain. A well-known example is "schadenfreude", a word borrowed from German that means "an unseemly pleasure at seeing the misfortune of others".

Today's word, "sophistry", is particularly useful in describing an argument coming from the Republican supporters of Trump and his attempt to nullify his election loss. When people who do not support Trump's attempted coup point out that Biden got more peoples' votes and even got more of the slavery-based Electoral College votes, a last-ditch defense of the Republican anti-democratic argument is that "America is not a democracy". They point at the Constitution and tell us that the word "democracy" does not appear anywhere, while the word "republic" does. So, they say, America must not be a democracy. 

In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson and the boys pointed forcefully at the natural rights of "man" and at their philosophy of government: "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed". It took 200 years of sometimes bloody conflict (Antietam, Edmund Pettus Bridge, etc.) for us to iron out the meaning of "Men", but we have never strayed from the idea that government is based on "the consent of the governed". Our republic is formed by the democratic election of representatives. The stability of our republic depends on our belief that our government answers to the voters. The Republicans' demand that our election be ignored because they didn't win is an arrogant abuse of power, something that the Constitution was specifically designed to prevent. 

The sophistry that America is "not a democracy" can only be floated when people do not recognize the deceit in the definitions. The "democracy" that the Republicans are referring to is the form used in Athens, 2,400 years ago. No one in their right minds would claim that America is just like Athens or that it should be. Our democracy is formed through our elections, and denying the power of the American people to choose their own leaders by tampering with our right to vote is seditious. 

Thursday, December 10, 2020

Political Propaganda is Destroying Christianity - my comment

 From: 

Political Propaganda is Destroying Christianity 

1 John 2:16 "for all that is in the world—the desire of the flesh, the desire of the eyes, the pride in riches—comes not from the Father but from the world." This seems to describe the American civic "religion" as the worship of Wealth, Power, and Ego. American society centers on the prestige that people gain by joining in this worship. "Winning" is intoxicating. "Power" is addictive. "Belittle your neighbor" is so much easier than "Love your neighbor". After all, "love" is expensive (see "Bonhoeffer").

Now, the "propaganda" that this article speaks of is an avalanche of lies, and the American context of those lies has buried deep within it a foundation of racism. Followers of the authentic Gospel cannot be content with simply denying the propaganda. That would require shaming liars who have no sense of shame. It seems to me that we need to be far more assertive in our proclamation of "love your neighbor" by being more clear and specific on the meanings (and cost) of "love" as well as its benefits. We need to spell out (as Jesus did with the Samaritan) who our neighbor is and the benefit of loving that neighbor.

Thursday, November 26, 2020

Is "Reverse Discrimination" a Real Thing?

 We hear charges of "reverse discrimination" in cases of college and law school admissions, in affirmative action hiring and promotion (eg. Colin Powell), in the appointment of women to corporate boards (as in Germany last week). These charges usually focus on an individual case, which makes it difficult to discern the truth. Let's try to find a way to view these situations with more perspective.

Of course, we will need an exaggerated, simplified metaphor with some hypothetical numbers. Here's a little town from nowhere special where the situation may give us a chance to see clearly. We can call it "Starkville" and we will look at the town in 1950. The East half of Starkville and the West half of Starkville are separated by "Division" Street. To the east of Division St., the homes are upper-middle-class or moderately wealthy. The streets and sidewalks are paved and in very good repair. The city budget for streets on the east side is $100,000, which is adequate to maintain them as the residents prefer. 

To the west of Division St., the houses are working-class or poorer. The streets are graded dirt and gravel with only one badly paved, seriously potholed through street. The city budget for the "streets" on the west side is $20,000.

When the national "enlightenment" of the 1960s passes over, Starkville realizes the error of its ways and resolves to bring about justice and equity in its civic infrastructure (the streets). Several serious issues arise, some immediate and some long-term.

First, simply dividing the $120,000 total city street budget in half will result in degrading the maintenance on the east, which will leave those taxpayers very unsatisfied. $60,000 is not enough to keep the streets in a manner they are accustomed to. Are the east-siders going to complain of "reverse discrimination" 

Second, raising the street budget for the west side to $100,000 will strain all the taxpayers of the city, but the tax increases will fall more heavily on the wealthier (east) side. Again, is this "reverse discrimination"?

And still one more question: the condition of the west side streets is the result of 100 years of (east-siders) willful neglect of their west-side neighbors. Simple "equality from now on" will never bring the actual infrastructure up to the level of the east side. The real need is for a full-scale repair to bring about true equality (also known as "justice"). Equal budgets AFTER the repair is completed will maintain that justice into the future.

The discrimination against the west side by the east side would always exist until the historical distortion that harmed the west side has been repaired. Any illusion of (reverse) discrimination harming the east side would always be a falsehood until then.

Thursday, November 5, 2020

The View from the Back Pew

 

The View from the Back Pew

At first glance, it seems that “politics” for many laypeople is only a question of which party they prefer. In many ways, the idea of “religion” is similar - a preference for a denomination. If these are the limits on the view from the back pew (laypeople in general), then there is nothing to discuss. The blunt instruments of “separation of church and state” and the IRS rules in 501(c)3 tell us to change the subject.

 

As soon as we scratch a little below the surface of either politics or religion, looking for more meaning in either, things become more complex - more interesting.

 

In all of the Church parishes where I have been a member, and in all of the social gatherings I find myself in (work, family, or neighborhood), there seems to be a common question underneath any discussion: “What is the right thing for us to do?” When we whittle it down to the most basic level, both religion and politics are seeking the same answers. What is right? What is wrong? What will it cost to do the right thing? What will it cost to ignore the right thing?

 

In America, both religion and politics have extensive documents of principles for making those “right vs wrong” decisions. Those principles overlap a lot and rarely conflict. “Love your neighbor as yourself” and “All [people] are created equal” say basically the same thing. Both faith and patriotism wrap our freedoms in a protective layer of responsibility. Cooperation and compassion are central virtues of both Church and State, not the exclusive province of one or the other.

 

The institution of the Church and our partisan power of the government need to be kept at arms-length or further apart. The actions of citizens in a Republic, however, need to be guided by a strong sense of right and wrong, wherever that sense comes from.

Monday, October 12, 2020

A Personal Relationship with Christ?

 The only way to measure someone's "personal relationship with Christ" is to measure their relationship to "neighbor". The parable of the "Good" Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37) is an excellent guide to the meanings of both "neighbor" and "love". Are the person's actions of "love" constructive and at least somewhat costly? Is the "neighbor" who is receiving that costly, constructive love someone who is outside the circles of family and friendship (or even citizenship)? A careful reading of the parable tells us that Jesus sees "love of neighbor" and "love of God" as the same thing.

Sunday, September 20, 2020

Churches Emerging From the "Zoom Cocoon"

 The foundation of the Christian faith (as taught by Jesus in His many parables) is forgiveness and constructive love toward all people. The disruption of our Church practices because of this pandemic has resulted in a loss of a very specific opportunity. Our parishes are a training ground for love and forgiveness. As with any skill, forgiveness and constructive love are learned through repeated practice and shared experience of the example of others.


When our "church" time is spent on Zoom (or whatever), we have almost no chance of irritating each other. With Zoom, no one is sitting in "your pew". There is plenty of room in the back row. There is probably no incense or strong perfume from the lady in front of you. Coffee hour will always have the kind of creamer and donuts that you prefer. The only fussy children bothering you are your own.

Even if the technology gives you trouble, there is no one actually present to blame. The skills of forgiveness and constructive love cannot be learned without actual people to practice them on, without real-life examples of the behaviors of our faith.

As we slowly emerge from our "Zoom Cocoons" and re-enter the messy, irritating community of our parish churches, we will certainly be celebrating the renewal of relationships. Let's also celebrate the opportunities to be irritated, to forgive, and to love each other in the way that makes us all more closely resemble Jesus.

Thursday, August 6, 2020

The best line in the TV series M*A*S*H: "War isn't Hell. War is war and Hell is Hell and of the two war is worse. Why? Because in Hell, there are no innocent bystanders". There are many discussions (?) going today over the ethics of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs. Most involve a comparison of the evils of the Japanese and the American war-fighting tactics and warrior cultures. These discussions cannot bear any fruit today since they are mostly wrapped in "presentism". The only moral conclusion that I can see coming out of this argument is that nuclear weapons SHOULD NEVER be used again. That should be an easy point for anyone to make, but it's just words. Translating "SHOULD NEVER" into reality will demand a renunciation of a tiny piece of sovereignty. That would be a very tiny mellowing of nationalism. It would require a resolve from every nation on earth to reject the violence of war as an instrument of international relations. After all, the stated reason for the nuclear option is the prevention of war through "mutually assured destruction (MAD)". That was the foundation of the "Cold War" between the US and the USSR. It worked so well that MAD was copied on a smaller scale by a dozen other countries. These confrontations all feature a "deadly embrace", a standoff where neither party can win but neither can afford to lose. Eliminating the "nukes" from the equations will certainly lead to one party "losing" unless the actual source of conflict is resolved.

To sum up:
  • Using Nukes is immoral
  • Inspiring the other to use a Nuke is immoral
  • Eliminating Nukes is good.
  • Eliminating Nukes is hard.
  • Why can't we all just get along?
That last line is not a flippant as it sounds. Until the world (all of it) makes war impossible, we will always "need" the biggest weapons possible.

Sunday, July 19, 2020

A Prayer for Today (19 July 2020) by Pastor Nadia Bolz-Weber

I do not know when we can gather together again in worship, Lord.

So, for now I just ask that:

When I sing along in my kitchen to each song on Stevie Wonder’s Songs in The Key of Life Album, that it be counted as praise. (Happy 70thBirthday, SW!)

And that when I read the news and my heart tightens in my chest, may it be counted as a Kyrie.

And that when my eyes brighten in a smile behind my mask as I thank the cashier may it be counted as passing the peace.

And that when I water my plants and wash my dishes and take a shower may it be counted as remembering my baptism.

And that when the tears come and my shoulders shake and my breathing falters, may it be counted as prayer.

And that when I stumble upon a Tabitha Brown video and hear her grace and love of you may it be counted as a hearing a homily.

And that as I sit at that table in my apartment, and eat one more homemade meal, slowly, joyfully, with nothing else demanding my time or attention, may it be counted as communion.

Amen.

 

-Nadia Bolz-Weber


Monday, July 6, 2020

A New Pledge of Allegiance

I pledge allegiance to the Republic 
of the United States of America, 
whose people live united under the rule of law,
with liberty and justice for all.

Saturday, July 4, 2020

For Those Who Claim "Innocence" from Racial Oppression:

A fence who "receives stolen property" is not a thief. However, the fact that he benefits from the crime committed by others is enough for us to judge him as if he were a participant. And then there is the fact of "Nazi plunder". There is still a concerted effort to return the art and treasure to their rightful owners. "Rightful owners". How much of the wealth of America resulted from the stolen labor of slaves and of Jim Crow-era oppression (North AND South)? How much continues to be stolen through the wide network of racist policies that we use to disguise our white advantages? The reason that the Enlightenment ideal of "corporate responsibility" has been buried under the anti-Christian ideas of "personal responsibility" and "individuality" is that it allows us, white people, some plausible deniability. Well, it's not so plausible anymore. Too much of our real history is being exhumed. I admire the effort the Episcopal Church is making to bring about racial healing and reconciliation. I am disappointed that many professing Christians are finding this so difficult.


Friday, June 19, 2020

The Illusion of "Race"

"South Pacific" premiered on Broadway in 1949. It has been revived at every level from High Schools, community theaters, summer stock, and back up to Broadway for 70 years. The central message of the show is in the song "You've Got to be Carefully Taught". 

"Race" is an illusion that we all carefully teach each other and our children as if it were real. We act out our lives as if the superiority or inferiority of this imaginary "difference" gains or loses us something. 

We participate in policies (legal and social) that assume that the racial illusion is reality. We need to change BOTH our laws AND our hearts to repair the damage that this 400-year-old hallucination has caused.

Thursday, May 28, 2020

Racial Reconciliation - A Primer for White People


The only people who can bring racial reconciliation tomorrow are the ones who are bringing racial injustice today. Yes, that's white people. The first step is education. 

Nearly every white person you know will swear on all their Bibles that they are NOT racist. That might or might not be true, but it is how they view themselves. But the REAL problem is the wide network of disadvantages that the last century of white efforts have constructed and tied together so that the people doing the work of disadvantage don't feel guilty. 

The bankers, real estate agents, and zoning committees have created segregated housing patterns. The school boards and city councils have created segregated schools. Employers value employees who "fit the corporate culture". Prosecutors, judges, and juries pass judgments based on the financial resources of the defending attorneys. Governments fund most of the local infrastructure from the local tax base (which has been financially segregated by the "white flight" relocation of the well-off). 

Tied into all of this is the uneven impact of pollution (and now, the coronavirus). Yes, that's a long way of describing where we are. Still, you cannot deliver the needed education of your white family and friends unless you understand the network of disadvantage that non-whites face. 

That is what "systemic racism" really is: a network of pitfalls and stumbling blocks.

Tuesday, May 5, 2020

Blame Game over COVID-SARS-2


Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity". Describing French, American, and Chinese medical and public health experts as "stupid" is probably too harsh. Until the difficult work of gene sequencing and contact tracing was done, this illness was "NOVEL". That means, never seen before. All of the finger-pointing now is mere "Monday Morning Quarterbacking". Everyone everywhere was fumbling in the dark in December and January. You can blame someone for still being clueless in February, but imagining this as a bio-weapon attack is nonsense.


Thursday, April 23, 2020



As the article says, this crisis is exposing the weaknesses of the US social safety net and its healthcare systems. This is showing how central these systems are to the real strength (or weakness) of the nation as a whole. What the article does not mention is the primary underlying reason for these weaknesses: Race. The US has a unique 400-year history of racial politics and it has not found the will to overcome that history. The results of our failure are being exposed now in the safety net and healthcare dysfunction. Those systems are intentionally underfunded because of the long-standing dread that white peoples' money will be taken from them and given to people of poverty (many of whom are people of color). This is not new! Many of the features of "The New Deal" were carefully designed to avoid benefitting African-Americans. Today, our widely recognized inequalities, with their special emphasis on racial inequality, are showing our national weakness to the whole world. Are we going to wake up to the fact that "We the people of the US" cannot be strong until that "we" includes everyone?

Tuesday, April 21, 2020

A Prayer of Spiritual Communion

Now, as we join in our time of separation with the Communion of Saints in every age and every place, may the Holy Spirit bring us all to the presence of Jesus in the Upper Room. May the remembrance of our adoration of the Body and Blood of Jesus, broken and shared with us and for us, bring us ever closer to Him and to our Father's kingdom on Earth and Heaven. May this sharing of our time of presence through the Holy Spirit also keep us present with each other until the time we are able to join in our worship communities again. We pray this in our trust and love of our Savior, Jesus Christ.

Thursday, April 2, 2020

On Our Theology of Worship: Questions in the Time of COVID-19, by Presiding Bishop Michael Curry

An Offering of Reflection by Presiding Bishop Michael Curry
On Our Theology of Worship: Questions in the Time of COVID-19
Across The Episcopal Church the current Pandemic has given rise to many questions about challenges to our liturgical life. Bishops are being asked, “May we do this or that? Will you permit this or that way of celebrating the Eucharist or delivering Holy Communion to the members of our congregations?” Some years ago in an essay titled “Is There a Christian Sexual Ethic?” Rowan Williams observed that in the then current debates about marriage rites for same sex couples, this “permissible/not permissible” way of conducting the conversation was a dead end. The real (and much more productive) question for a sacramental people, he said, was not simply whether a given practice was “right or wrong,” but rather “How much are we prepared for this or that liturgical action to mean?” How much are we prepared for it to signify? Sacraments effect by signifying.
Sacraments are actions that give new meaning to things. The current questions about the way we worship in a time of radical physical distancing invites the question of what we are prepared for a given sacramental encounter to mean. Sacraments are communal actions that depend on “stuff”: bread and wine, water and oil. They depend on gathering and giving thanks, on proclaiming and receiving the stories of salvation, on bathing in water, on eating and drinking together. These are physical and social realities that are not duplicatable in the virtual world. Gazing at a celebration of the Eucharist is one thing; participating in a physical gathering and sharing the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist is another. And, God, of course, can be present in both experiences.
And that is surely the most important thing to remember. From the time of Thomas Cranmer, mainstream Anglicanism has insisted that the Holy Eucharist is to be celebrated in community, with no fewer than two people. In contrast to some medieval practices, the Prayer Book tradition was deeply concerned with reestablishing the essential connection between the celebration of the Eucharist and the reception of Holy Communion. Over time, of course, many factors contributed to a general decline in the celebration of the Eucharist well into the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and Morning Prayer became the common service of worship on the Lord’s Day. And while it is good and right that the situation has changed dramatically, that the Holy Eucharist has again become the principal act of worship on Sunday across our church, few would suggest that the experience of Morning Prayer somehow limited God’s presence and love to generations of Anglican Christians. There are members of our church today who do not enjoy a regular sustained celebration of the Eucharist for a variety of reasons other than this Pandemic — they are no less members of Christ’s Body because of it.
Practices such as “drive-by communion” present public health concerns and further distort the essential link between a communal celebration and the culmination of that celebration in the reception of the Eucharistic Bread and Wine. This is not to say that the presence of the Dying and Rising Christ cannot be received by any of these means. It is to say that from a human perspective, the full meaning of the Eucharist is not obviously signified by them. Our theology is generous in its assurance of Christ’s presence in all our times of need. In a rubric in the service for Ministration to the Sick (p. 457), The Book of Common Prayer clearly expresses the conviction that even if a person is prevented from physically receiving the Sacrament for reasons of extreme illness or disability, the desire for Christ’s presence alone is enough for all the benefits of the Sacrament to be received.
Richard Hooker described the corporate prayer of Christians as having a spiritual significance far greater than the sum of the individual prayers of the individual members of the body. Through corporate prayer, he said, Christians participate in communion with Christ himself, “joined … to that visible, mystical body which is his Church.” Hooker did not have in mind just the Eucharist, which might have taken place only quarterly or, at best, monthly in his day. He had very much in mind the assembly of faithful Christians gathered for the Daily Office.
While not exclusively the case, online worship may be better suited to ways of praying represented by the forms of the Daily Office than by the physical and material dimensions required by the Eucharist. And under our present circumstances, in making greater use of the Office there may be an opportunity to recover aspects of our tradition that point to the sacramentality of the scriptures, the efficacy of prayer itself, the holiness of the household as the “domestic church,” and the reassurance that the baptized are already and forever marked as Christ’s own. We are living limbs and members of the Body of Christ, wherever and however we gather. The questions being posed to Bishops around these matters are invitations to a deeper engagement with what we mean by the word “sacrament” and how much we are prepared for the Church itself — with or without our accustomed celebrations of the Eucharist — to signify about the presence of God with us.

Wednesday, February 26, 2020

Keep Calm and Mind the Big Picture




 

Keep Calm and Mind the Big Picture

The Democratic Party nomination drama (chaos?) should not be seen as threatening. It is actually a very hopeful sign of the possibilities for our future. It is a future that the Republican Party has shown that it cannot (or will not) deliver.

Even an unbiased view of the wreckage that is the current administration shows epic incompetence in every department. The number of department heads who are “acting” after three years into this term is amazing. The number resignations of competent staff in professional and scientific positions is unheard of. The only qualification for top posts in this administration is fealty to Donald Trump.

So what can we imagine in the administration headed by a Democratic Party president? Tom Friedman in The New York Times whipped up a list of leaders that we might see in a Sanders administration:

Amy Klobuchar - Vice President
Mike Bloomberg - Secretary of Treasury
Joe Biden - Secretary of State
Elizabeth Warren - Secretary of Health and Human Services
Kamala Harris - Attorney General
Pete Buttigieg - Secretary of Homeland Security
Cory Booker - Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
Mitt Romney - Secretary of Commerce
Michael Bennet - Secretary of Education
William H. McRaven - Secretary of Defense

Nearly every ideological and economic viewpoint of the common American will be represented. (Yes, it excludes white supremacists. So?) This is one of the strong points of the Democratic Party that is often mistaken for weakness, especially by the media. In the campaign season, the wide range of viewpoints and constituencies makes the Party look divided. After the campaign when it is time to actually govern this nation, the cross-pollination of ideas and the competition among equals leads to actual solutions to problems. 

Message to Democratic and Democrat-leaning and independent voters: 

Mind the Big Picture. 

You will not be electing only a President. You will be electing a wide range of Cabinet Secretaries, deputies, and department heads. The experience of the past Democratic administrations shows that they will likely carry both integrity and competence, the two most important character traits for governance. As we see, those are character traits sadly absent in the current administration.


Thursday, February 6, 2020

A Eulogy for Conservatism.


A Eulogy for Conservatism
by Craig S. Coleman
I taught American Government as a teaching assistant during the Clinton impeachment, and the impeachment proceedings were a prominent source of discussion in our classes. During discussions, I was one of the few in the room who generally withheld criticism of the Republican effort to impeach and remove Clinton, and I often went further by defending its merits. I agreed with the Republican premise that honesty and character matter in a president and that the office of the presidency must be held to a high standard given the power it wields. I was profoundly troubled that a president could baldly lie directly to me and the American people, and the fact that the lie was unnecessary did not lessen that betrayal in my mind. And count me among those who believe that a person’s regard for their marital vows may reflect on their faithfulness to an oath of office, that it is wrong to trade on power for sex, and that it is not mere private vice when men exploit women for sexual gratification. I certainly understood and acknowledged that many Republicans were espousing these rationales more as an exercise of partisan expediency than sincere belief, and that Republicans could be fairly accused of leveraging impeachment for political gain rather than genuine commitment to moral principle. But even if their motives were mixed, surely there was benefit in our Republican leaders going on record demanding accountability, honesty, and moral integrity of the presidency, right? We could take comfort that we can count on them to zealously advocate those standards, couldn’t we?
And at least during the Clinton impeachment, the Republican party was articulating conservative values. While I generally disagree – often vehemently – with the policy prescriptions that flow from conservative principles, our republic benefits from participation of a political party that is faithful to conservative values, will advocate them, and will abide the courage of sincere conservative convictions. Before its descent into nativist vitriol and embrace of willful, cretinous ignorance, conservatism could be understood to stand for something meaningful, for principles that should have a place in our national debate. That objective truth exists. That the identification and adherence to hard truths require steely commitment to open, often uncomfortable debate. That authoritarianism is an evil, and American foreign policy and military power should be deployed to confront it. That while we must rely on private institutions to instill virtue, we should value and demand self-restraint, honesty, and rectitude in our political leaders. That free trade is the path to progress and collective good. That we have an obligation to safeguard the fisc, necessitating discipline and hard choices to achieve balanced budgets. That the rule of law should be placed above the reach of political power and that all persons should be impartially subject to it and equally so. That skepticism of political power should inform our constitutional system. That strict adherence to our constitutional design demands rigorous oversight of the executive branch to achieve transparency, expose truth, and limit the reach of its power. That strict neutrality is the antidote to prejudice and discrimination based on racial, religious, or ethnic status. That respect for personhood demands elimination of racial classification. That tradition and received collective wisdom should be embraced as a hedge against humanity’s tendency toward self-conceit and hubris.
As to my own beliefs, I’ve always been a progressive because I believe that the moral imperative to care about and attempt to alleviate the suffering of others extends to our civic life, that government should be an instrument to improve the lives and condition of humanity, that public resources must be protected from private avarice, and that equal opportunity is an ideal toward which we should strive and doing so requires the intervention of government. But I nonetheless respect true conservative principles. I believe at least some of them. I have admired those who genuinely hold and fight for them. I can be convinced that conservative principles should at times be controlling, given the circumstances. Most of all, I believe that our democracy is better for having a vigorous competition between progressive and conservative principles and that a healthy democracy depends on a robust contest of ideas. I obviously want my political priorities to prevail, but I value having conservative statespersons serving as vigorous interlocutors in our public life and willingly accept that they will and should sometimes win the day. An ongoing, good-faith push and pull of political competition is the lifeblood of our constitutional democracy, and our republic is elevated by the clear vision of our leaders’ principled convictions.
That reality is why I’ve found it to be truly wrenching that the Trump era, culminating in the Republican handling of his impeachment, has unequivocally exposed that the Republican party can no longer even maintain the conceit that it represents conservative values. We have witnessed the entirety of the Republican party betray, abandon, and directly violate every last conservative principle articulated above. We are faced with a Republican party that is no longer cognizably conservative at all, and is now instead defined by the bigotry, intolerance, and cheap ethno-nationalism of the worst in its movement. I’ve found it equal parts angering, terrifying, and heartbreaking to be forced to accept that, in short, the Republican party no longer functions as a good-faith partner in a constitutional democracy. Rather than checking the excesses of factionalism feared by the framers, the Republican party has wholly succumbed and given itself over to it. The Republican’s performance since Trump’s election has consistently revealed that any last vestige of salutary conservative principles has now been subjugated to the party’s craven, debased commitment to one solitary concern: acquisition and maintenance of partisan political power. That’s the reality of our political life for the foreseeable future.


Thursday, January 2, 2020

Why Watch Fox News


It is possible to watch Fox News without the danger of mental illness if you are well educated in the psychology of propaganda, the history of its misuse (eg. Goebbels), and the actual history of the United States (not the high school textbook version). Oh, and you also need to keep the mute button close at hand.

It's not ALL propaganda. The great failing of our dying democracy has been the inability of conservatives and liberals to work together to solve the problems of the common people of this country. As a liberal, I tend to see that as a result of the conservative lust for power as a means to concentrate wealth in the hands of their supporters. I'm sure most conservatives think we liberals just want to steal all their money to give to worthless people. But I remember a time when we accepted the theory of a "government of the people, by the people, for the people". We can only get back to that by resolving the schism between left and right. Split your news watching between Fox News and MSNBC, but also take the time to read real news with the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal.