Tag: American Election 2020

A Letter to the Editor, #2

Posted on by Peter Scott Cameron

February 22, 2024

Editor
The Washington County Free Press
P.O. Box 330
Granville, NY 12832

Dear Editor:

I am responding to the article, Stefanik demands NYS attorney general be disbarred or suspended, which appeared in the February 23 edition of your paper.

I want to say: on the contrary. It is Elise Stefanik who should step down or be removed, for her failure to uphold her constitutional duties in refusing to certify the presidential vote of 2020. And further to that, her support for a candidate who has openly expressed his desire to be a dictator in our democracy should disqualify her from public office. This is shameful backing of the presidential candidate who, it is now legally established, committed sexual assault and defamed the victim, and who committed fraud in his business activities, and who is further charged with election interference in both Federal and State cases.

Letitia James on the other hand, has carried out her duties with dedication and ability; she is a credit to her profession.

Yours truly,

Peter S. Cameron

CC: Representative Elise Stefanik

Postscript to: The Day Democracy Died

Posted on by Peter Scott Cameron

A follow-up, and by no means is this my original thought, and I wish it were unnecessary to say so, but…

      Regarding the anemic (and in some cases even accommodating, if not outright assisting [i]) response of law enforcement with the insurrectionists: had this not been white Trump followers, but instead it had been Black Lives Matter protesters, and especially if protesters attempted to enter the Capitol building, there would have been a very different response. I believe there would have been bloody heads, tears streaming from the eyes of maced protestors, hundreds of arrests on the spot, and bodies on the steps.[ii]

     That said, I know many Capitol police officers acted with great courage. My condolences to the family of Brian Sicknick, the officer killed by an insurrectionist. I am so sorry for him and for all those who loved him. He was a really good, well-loved person. This should not have happened.

     Please read Phyllis Cavanagh’s comment; I am trying to get there.

     I also want to mention that “Democracy” in the original post was intentionally capitalized in all cases, i.e., Democracy as a venerable institution.

[i] Sam Levin, US Capitol riot: police have long history of aiding neo-Nazis and extremists. The Guardian, January 16, 2021.

[ii] Substantiated by social science findings. Lois Beckett, US police three times as likely to use force against leftwing protesters, data finds. The Guardian, January 14, 2021.

The Day Democracy Died

Posted on by Peter Scott Cameron

Yesterday, January 6, 2021, many of us watched in horror as a mob of white supremacist militia members, conspiracy theorist adherents, Christian evangelicals, bikers, “ordinary” Trump supporters, miscreants, and out-and-out thugs breached the defenses of the United States Capitol Building, a world-wide symbol of Democracy. They did so at the unequivocal urging of the rogue American President, and with the aid and abetting of a group of Congressional Representatives and Senators, seeking to overturn legitimate election results.

     Some watched in horror, but to be sure, there were many who watched not with horror at all, but rather with hope and joy in their hearts.

     The day was intended to be solemn and ceremonial: the ritual acknowledgement of the will of the people in choosing the next President. That is, Congress had gathered to ratify the votes of the Electoral College and to affirm the peaceful transfer of power. Instead, insurrectionists pushed aside police, terrified public servants, invaded the Senate Chambers, and one hoodlum even desecrated the office of the Speaker of the House, while elected members and senators were squirreled away to safety.

     The President, after earlier in the day exhorting people to do exactly this, later suggested that they “go home” but while doing so affirmed once more his lies to the effect that the election was stolen. And he concluded by saying to the white supremacists, the Neo-Nazis, the deluded, the thugs and the malefactors: “we love you” and “you are very special.”

     And so, Democracy died yesterday.

     But Democracy does not die all at once. It dies by a thousand – or a hundred – different cuts. It dies when people affirm the worst, not the best, in us. It dies when we, and our elected representatives, serve ourselves, and not the community. It dies when we turn away from decency and working to make the world a better place, and instead feed our hatreds, and stoke the suspicions of those who live in fear of “the other.” For Americans, it dies when we give up on the ideal of toiling for a “more perfect union.”

     And so, we can say that Democracy died yesterday. But we can also say that it died previously, on Election Day, November 3, 2015, when the country elected a cheater, a reality television star, a grifter, a person who represented the lowest in us, rather than the highest: a person without the temperament, the competence, the intelligence, and the moral character to assume and carry out his duties. A case in point: the complete dereliction of duty during this Covid crisis, which has only accelerated in the post-election period, and resulted thousands upon thousands of additional deaths, the responsibility for which can be laid directly at his feet, along with the dangerous crisis of governance that we are in right now.

     However, we can also say that Democracy died before that, when Mitch McConnell assumed Senate leadership, on January 3, 2015. He stated his main goal: the vindictive (and I believe, racist) determination to ensure failure of the Obama presidency. And Democracy died again and again during his tenure: for example, on March 16, 2016, when Merrick Garland was nominated by Barak Obama for the Supreme Court and McConnell refused to bring the nomination to the floor. Or again on October 26, 2020, when he presided over the confirmation of the theocratic cult member Amy Coney Barret, to replace the noble Ruth Bader Ginsburg on that same court. Or simply: Democracy died every time he refused to bring helpful legislation to the floor of the Senate. This is not about having a “loyal opposition,” helping to ensure that the government in power has some checks and stays in balance. This is about a regressive white man from a small State, illegitimately controlling the legislative agenda for the entire nation, without being elected to do so.

     Perhaps it was the Supreme Court itself that inflicted a death, in its Citizens United decision of January 21, 2010, when it struck down restrictions on “independent expenditures from corporate treasures,” thereby affirming that corporations would be unfettered in spending and bribing in their efforts to cultivate favour and direct legislative benefit toward themselves.

     We could say that Democracy died the day that Newt Gingrich became House Speaker on January 3, 1995. He ushered in a new, invigorated era of demagoguery and has never stopped carrying that flag.

     Reflecting on my lifetime, though, I go back further: yes, to the criminality of Richard Nixon; but at least he was found out and summarily (relative to today, that is), resigned rather than facing certain expulsion. (This, of course, is exactly what should happen to the current President, even though Joe Biden is taking over in thirteen days. Donald Trump is unhinged and unfit for office and should be relieved of his duties immediately.)

     But all that aside for now, I would also say that the death of Democracy occurred on August 12, 1986, when then President Reagan said: “The most terrifying words in the English language are: ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’ ” People chuckled and nodded their heads upon hearing this nefarious witticism, but Reagan had planted a most destructive seed. Since that time, many Americans have turned away from an ideal: turned away from the idea of good, helpful, fair, and honourable government as a venerable and worthy institution.

     The culmination of this was yesterday, when an ignorant, vicious mob disrupted the ceremonial duties of government – aided and abetted by the President himself as well by at least six Republican Senators and one hundred and forty Republican Representatives, including mine, Elise Stefanik, who voted to overturn the election results.

     And so, what now?

     Well, some would say that Democracy also lived yesterday. Despite all, the will of the people was affirmed, the voting result of the archaic[i] Electoral College was ratified. The Representatives and the Senators reconvened as soon as they were able, and over the objection of their less-than-honourable colleagues, did their duty in the wee hours of the night. It was a remarkable affirmation.

     And one way or another, the current occupant of the White House and his corrupt family will be gone in less than two weeks. There is reason to hope and reason to believe in the resilience of the country, and that the United States will continue with its aspiration [ii] to become a real Democracy. The country has elected a President this time who is the very embodiment of decency, who more than anything works to bring out the best in us. And we have elected a Vice-President who champions justice and affirms the ambitions and capabilities of women – and men – everywhere, of all creeds and colours and ethnicities. And so, there is much to celebrate.

     But I cannot say that I am entirely optimistic. The Trump supporters who believe the lie that the election was stolen, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, are still here. Their signs remain in their yards nearby my home, even today. I find myself struggling to find a way to understand and accept this. Also, the White Supremacists, the Misogynists, the Haters, the Militias, the Theocratic Evangelicals, the Conspiracy Believers are all still here. They are not going anywhere. I, and we, must find a way to limit their toxicity.  

    So, what, in the end, can we think and do? Rather than embrace blind optimism, I would rather abide by the words of Antonio Gramsci, who was imprisoned by the Fascists in Italy and died eventually because of the deterioration of his health and the neglect of same by his jailers. Of course, I do not embrace his Marxist philosophy, but I find a famous aphorism that he was fond of quoting to be helpful in a time like this. [iii]

     Gramsci advocated “pessimism of the intellect,” along with “optimism of the will.”   Pessimism of the intellect:  things will not get better by themselves. They will not even get better once and for all.  Optimism of the will:  we must never give up in the face of these setbacks. We must be unyielding in our striving for what is good, what is decent, what is fair and just.  We must help the Nation take its steps from an aspiring Democracy, to an actual one. In the face of darkness, it is sometimes all we can do is keep the lights on and try again in the light of morning.

     My heart is bitter today. In my weakness, I can only reach for inspiration from the great ones: Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Susan B. Anthony, Jane Addams, Martin Luther King, and the young Nobel prize laureate, Malala Yousafzai. I do not have their capacity, I do not have their courage, and I certainly do not have their love. But I can, at least, aspire to these.

     And we, as a people, can continue to aspire to Democracy, to go forward, and not only for our citizens, but all of humanity, to achieve a more perfect union.       

PSC

January 7, 2021

_____________________________________________

[i] More on this another time.

[ii] More on this, too, another time. It is true that formally, the U.S. is the oldest intentional aspiring Democracy, but it is not yet fully one.

[iii] He attributed this to the novelist, Romain Rolland.

Leadership and The Shadow King: A Jungian Perspective on the American Election

Posted on by Peter Scott Cameron

It will surprise no one to say that the United States faces a stark choice this November in its choice of President, and that the nation is in a precarious state, with an election season and process that is quite unlike any in memory. There is no need to name the protagonists; we know who they are.

     There have been many challenging times since the American Civil War, but not many in which there was so little political stability, and in which the population was so cloven apart as it is now.

      Carl Jung, the great psychoanalyst, would comprehend what has happened. He would tell us that we, the people, have fallen under the power of the shadow, that dark part of our unconscious – the collective unconscious in this case – as the Germans once did, in the 1930’s. Hitler’s power was not political, Jung claimed; rather it was magic. It was magic because its power derives from the unconscious and the shadow. (i)

 

In Jungian psychology, among the archetypes – those primordial images or psychic energies hard-wired into the unconscious of human beings – there is the powerful archetype of the “King.” It could just as well be the “Queen”; (ii)  in either case it is the Leader who provides order and stability for the nation. The good King embodies reasonability, responsibility, rational patterns of action, integrity and honest purpose – not just demonstrating these on behalf of the people, but, rather, integrating these, so that he lives them in his own life and persona. With both firmness and kindness, he affirms deserving others, and in doing so creates a “fertilizing” calm and centeredness within which the people can flourish and become their best selves. The King serves – not himself – but the people and the earth. He mirrors and embodies the best intentions of people, and thereby fosters harmony and creative opportunity for the folk to grow and develop. (iii) Because of his service, there is mostly peace in the land as people go about the business of providing for families, prospering, and developing their best selves. 

     But there are times, when the conditions are right, wherein the “Shadow King” emerges. The conditions that allow the him to emerge are times in which the shadow itself – a dark part of character that has potential for destructiveness, the hiding place of repressed and often enough, negative energies (iv) –  has emerged from the collective unconscious of the people. (v) The Shadow King is both a reflection of dark forces, and an instigator of those same forces in the population.  

     The Shadow King is bipolar; he exhibits characteristics of both the tyrant and the weakling. Far from calm and generative, he embodies hatred and fear, and will actively incite those feelings in others. His “degradation of others knows no bounds,” because he “hates all beauty, all innocence, all strength, all talent, all life energy.” This happens because he has no “inner structure” of an assured and serene self, and is terrified of “his own hidden weakness and his underlying lack of potency.” (vi) 

     The land and the people cannot flourish under the Shadow King. His unrelenting assaults on people’s hopes, interests and talents, his constant deprecation of others, his promulgation of falsehoods, and the relentless self-promotion of his own interests will ensure confusion. Disorder will prevail. The people will become divided and fall into open conflict with one another. The quality of public discourse will degrade. Winning, rather than compromise and accommodation for all, will become the goal. Everyday problems will fail to be addressed. Feelings and actions will become more aggressive toward one another. Paranoid ideas of conspiracy will spread among the population. The Shadow King will draw out previously hidden fears and hatreds in the populace; he will provide legitimacy and a forum for these violent impulses. And because the Shadow King is extremely sensitive to criticism, when challenged, he will become threatening; at the slightest provocation, what the people will see is rage – the rage of a toddler, in fact.  

     And that latter is the most revealing of the underlying problem: the psychological problem of arrested development, the rage of the immature self, the inherent inadequacy of the personality frozen in childhood narcissism, ultimately lacking the development of a normal human conscience.     

     This is where we are, in America. For reasons that are deep in the collective psyche and history of the nation, we have elected the Shadow King, and mired in a projection of our own unconscious, are considering whether to elect him once more. Most frightening, it is not entirely clear what choice we will make.  

     It is not such a surprise that the Shadow King has been elevated to leadership in America at this time. America, that sunny, Enlightenment-founded and forward-seeking society, drags behind it a very long bag of shadow material, dating back to its origins in patriarchy and plutocracy, along with the ownership of African human beings as property, and the attempted genocide of the Indigenous People. As well-meaning as the country has been, there have been no true efforts at public national reconciliation of these things, so of course, it all remains in the collective unconscious, and stays as a toxin within an otherwise noble experiment. (More on that another time.)  

     But also, it is no coincidence that the election of the Shadow King directly followed the presidency of a man of colour, a person of partial African descent. Though he was not the descendent of American slaves, in the collective psyche he represented that, and he had a foreign-sounding name, and these were intolerable for much of the population. Then followed the near election of a woman as President, a person who, although not without flaws, was strong, experienced, and forceful. She won most of the votes of the people – but was prevented from assuming the role of Queen by that remnant of the patriarchal, plutocratic system, the Electoral College.  

     This all follows a principle of a certain kind of “social physics,” we might call it, where for every social action, there is an opposing, equal reaction. Progressive social steps will stimulate their opposites. Thus, the good King of partial African descent and the near election of a strong Queen was followed by a rejection of all that and by the ascension of a hyper-masculine, misogynistic, supremacist Shadow King. 

     Of course, not all people accepted this – particularly women did not. For the most part, they knew exactly what they saw before them. They precisely knew who had been elected. They took to the streets, in millions, all over the country, wearing their pink “pussy-hats,” warning the rest of us of what was to come.  

     And so now: the election of 2020 is upon us. One option is to affirm the leadership of the Shadow King.  

     The other option is choosing a good, if humanly imperfect King. He is a person with compassion for others, one who eaten more than one full meal of the ashes of his own grief, and therefore is sensitive to the grief and longings of others. He is one who has known failure along with success; one who knows that it is human to stumble, and human again to pick oneself up. He is one who admits and understands his mistakes, and so not only learns from them, but also is willing to help others adjust themselves and move toward integrity and growth.

 

There are days that I think we are at the point of no return as a nation. I admit that I am afraid of what we will do. Our election choice not mysterious, not cloudy. On the one hand, on the ballot is the Shadow King. We have the experience of him and know what that is and what the future will be if we allow his leadership to continue.

     On the other hand, on the ballot is the ordinary, the human, the good King. We do not yet have the experience of this person as King; but we do know very well who he is, and we know his long service to the nation. 

     The choice is as stark, and as telling, as it could be.

_______________________________________________________ 

(i) Knickerbocker, Hubert R. Is Tomorrow Hitler’s?  (Omnibook Magazine, February 1942). Retrieved from “Old Magazine Articles,” http://www.oldmagazinearticles.com/carl_jung_studied_hitler#.Wfi00hNSy-U.

(ii) I will use the “King” here, but it could just as well be “Queen.” For our purposes, gender, although it plays out powerfully in American public life, is not the issue in the present discussion. I use “King” simply because both candidates currently are male, and America has not yet found itself willing to elect a “Queen.”

(iii) Moore, Robert, and Douglas Gillette. King Warrior Magician Lover (HarperOne, 1990), 49 – 74.

(iv) Johnson, Robert A. Owning Your Own Shadow (HarperSanFrancisco, 1991), 4.

(v) The Shadow is not made entirely of destructive energy; it can also include more positive energies, such as exuberant and creative impulses that are put away – stuffed into the “long bag” – as a result of social conditioning, particularly in childhood. See Bly, Robert. A Little Book on the Human Shadow (HarperOne, 1988), 17 – 26.

(vi) Moore and Gillette, King Warrior Magician Lover. 64.