Tag: Biden

News Flash! January 6 Passes Uneventfully!

Posted on by Peter Scott Cameron

     January 6th and the certification of the American 2024 election passed yesterday without incident. The proceedings were completely normal and routine.

     There were no transgender women and childless cat ladies storming the capitol. There were no pro-abortion activists breaking windows. There were no feminists wearing combat gear attacking security guards. There were no Black Lives Matter protesters using their flag poles as lances against the Capitol Police. There were no woke climate change advocates roaming the hallways of the legislative building searching for the Republican speaker of the House. There were no radical, leftist DEI trainers shouting slogans while wearing buffalo robes, blue paint, and horned helmets. There were no wild-eyed Bernie Sanders followers tearing around the building looking for legislators to assault. There were no calls from within the Democratic membership for the hanging of Kamala Harris. President Biden did not exhort insurrectionists to violence in order to “stop the steal.” There were no deaths. Democracy was not imperiled.

     No, it all went off as it should: a civil process done with civility and dignity.

     I think this tells you most of what you need to know about Biden versus Trump, about the Democratic party and about the Republican party as it is now constituted, and the adherents of each.

     I realize that saying this is not in the spirit of reconciliation. Nelson Mandela I am not, it appears. Angry is what I am.(1)

________________________________________________

 1.  I acknowledge and am grateful to Mike Pence for his courage and his adherence to duty and decency four years ago. That can be taken as a sign that all is not lost.

A Letter to the President

Posted on by Peter Scott Cameron

January 3, 2025

President Joseph Biden
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20500

Dear President Biden:

     We are writing to express our heartfelt gratitude for your service in the White House, and really for your whole life. We will miss you and your decency and thoughtfulness more than can be measured.

     You served honorably for all those years in public life – in the Senate, as vice-president, and finally president – and in the latter you guided us out of both a great public health crisis, but also out of the chaos and negativity of the regime that preceded you. You also did right things that were so urgently needed: including getting America on a path to mitigate climate change and restoring credibility and decency to our relationships with our allies.

     Of course, there were tremendous challenges: Ukraine, Afghanistan, Gaza and Israel, a Supreme Court gone awry – none of which had easy or obvious solutions. Nevertheless, we could trust that you were doing your best, with grace and intelligence.

     You were, quite simply, a great president, and history will say so.

     Thank you.

     We are most apprehensive about what is next, but we will keep you and Vice-President Harris in mind, as beacons, to guide us through the darkness.

Yours truly,

Peter S. Cameron

Kathleen C. Flanagan

A Thank You to Uncle Joe

Posted on by Peter Scott Cameron

The old news is that Joe Biden, under great pressure, yet graciously and selflessly, has taken himself out of the presidential race.

     I will step around an opinion about whether or not this was the right thing to happen, although it is clear that the Democratic campaign is reinvigorated under the capable and battle-ready Kamala Harris. So be it. The orange-headed bloviator must be defeated.

     I will say that I have been appalled by the public attacks on President Biden over the past weeks by supposed supporters, his fellow Democrats, and press members such as the New York Times and The Economist. Shame. The issue is not whether they were right that he should go; rather, it is about the public disloyalty and the disheartening take-down of this venerable leader. Et Tu, Brute?! As an aside, but in relation to this, I hereby give notice that I have cancelled George Clooney.

     That said, let us take a moment to praise and thank Uncle Joe. He has been an exceptional president. He has accomplished the nearly impossible, after inheriting the chaotic mess left by his predecessor. He quickly established administrative order, bringing in many top minds to help the effort. He directed the country to come to grips with the menacing pandemic. In partnership with the Fed, he led the charge against runaway inflation, and pretty much stopped it in its tracks, the best record in the Western economies. Against the great odds of the recalcitrant legislative bodies, he managed to get legislation through that has begun to address America’s tattered infrastructure, while generating jobs, and he set country on a course to address climate change, the first president to do so. He also inaugurated a modernization of the American economy, moving toward high-level manufacturing, for example, in nanotechnology and renewables. And he did all this while restoring America’s position as a respectable, honourable, and trustworthy international partner for the world’s democracies, a position trashed by his hoodlum predecessor. Without being inflammatory or reckless, he took on the autocrats of China and Russia. We could say that, at least thus far, along with the European allies and Canada, he has saved Ukraine. What a record for a short three-and-a-half years!

     Of course, he has not been perfect. Although following a script written by the previous administration, he left Afghanistan in a shambles, and in the hands of the monstrous Taliban. And his – shall we call it ambivalent? – support for  the thuggish Prime Minister Netanyahu, in the face of the Gaza tragedy, has been perplexing at best. He has been between a rock and a hard place with Israeli policy, the situation is hideously complex, and the massacre by Hamas was unbelievably barbaric – but still. More should have been done to prevent the wipe-out of Gaza and so many everyday people.

     But in the end, he has been a good man and an excellent president. He has cared, and has tried to do the right thing as he saw it. He has acted honourably in the face of nearly insurmountable odds and cynical opposition. And he has acted honourably once again, by acceding to the wishes of his party, and withdrawing.

     We owe this man, Joe Biden, immense gratitude. Immense. We are in his debt. Thank you, Uncle Joe.

It Makes Ya Think, Don’t It! (4)

Posted on by Peter Scott Cameron

A Harris-Guardian Poll in May 2024, (1) shows that the majority of Americans believe, incorrectly, that the U.S. is in recession (and blame Joe Biden).

     Beliefs:

1. 55% think the economy is shrinking and 56% believe the country is in a recession.
2. 49% believe the stock market, particularly the S&P 500 is down for the year.
3. 49% believe that unemployment has hit a 50-year high.
4. 72% think that the rate of inflation is increasing.
5. 55% say that the economy is “only getting worse.”

     Facts:

1. 2023 GDP for the U.S. grew by 2.5%, (2) real disposable income increased by 4.3%, savings rate increased by 4.5%. (3) GDP growth continued in the first quarter of 2024. The last recession was in 2020, at the height of the pandemic.

2. The S&P was up 24% in 2023, is up 12% so far this year, and this month the DOW hit its highest level ever, over 40,000.

3. Unemployment is at a 50 year low, consistently hovering below 4%.

4. The rate of inflation is decreasing from its post-pandemic high of 9% plus, and is now around 3.4% (above the target rate of 2%, but still decreasing toward the goal).

5. The economy has improved continuously since the pandemic low (of 128 million jobs in the economy). Since April, 2020,  not only did those jobs recover to the pre-pandemic 150 million job level, but we are now at 158 million jobs and disposable income is rising above the inflation rate.

     It makes ya think. All this information is commonly available on regular mainstream news sources – although not on Fox “News,” of course, where such content is suppressed.

     I’m confused. Are we still considered to be in the “information age?”

_______________

1. Aratani, Lauren. Majority of Americans wrongly believe US is in recession – and most blame Biden. The Guardian, May 22, 2024. Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ article/2024/may/22/poll-economy-recession-biden. 

2. Gross Domestic Product, Fourth Quarter and Year 2023 (Advance Estimate). U. S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, January 25, 2024. Retrieved from: https://www.bea.gov/news/2024/ ross-domestic-product-fourth-quarter-and-year-2023-advance-estimate.

3. By the Numbers: U.S. Economy Grows Faster than Expected for Year and Final Quarter of 2023. U.S. Department of Commerce, January 26, 2024. Retrieved from: https://www.commerce. gov/news/blog/2024/01/numbers-us-economy-grows-faster-expected-year-and-final-quarter-2023. 

 

What Has Befallen Us: Hitler and the Rise of Trump

Posted on by Peter Scott Cameron

What has befallen America? It has been a privilege to split my life between two great democracies, Canada and the United States, and I have lived comfortably here despite the country’s foibles. I became a citizen after 9/11, as an expression of gratitude for and solidarity with the American people. The U.S. has been generous and hospitable to me, and I am grateful.

     And yet. I have grown increasingly disquieted and anxious here among my neighbours and fellow citizens. After a first inexplicable and frightening Trump presidency, and with electoral polls showing him possibly winning again, I no longer feel at home in this United States. How could nearly half the people support such a person?

     Before the 2020 election, my neighbours over the hill and down the road hung their Trump banners on their house and barn: Finally a president with balls, one stated. On a few weekends before the election, they practised shooting their semi-automatic weapons in their fields. They mowed gigantic letters into their hillside: FREEDOM. After Joe Biden was elected, they hung their huge American flag, inverted, dominating the hilltop, meaning: Distress. Extreme danger to life and property. Who are these people?

 

I fear they are the same people who allowed Hitler to take power in 1933 in Germany. The everyday view of Hitler’s ascent is that he “seized” power, but this not really correct. Instead, the despot was handed power by enablers who believed they could control and manage him. He was appointed Chancellor, through the legitimate democratic process of the time. Then he consolidated and took over, using available means. He did not have a mandate from the majority in the election that preceded his appointment; rather, he was given his position as a kind of compromise candidate, even though most of the “conservative political class” at the time regarded him as a “chaotic clown” – an idiot. (1)

     Here in America, we are facing a situation that is parallel to the Weimar Republic of 1933. Although the mechanisms are different, we have an aspiring dictator who may well be handed power once again in November of this year. This is despite the facts: that Trump is a convicted fraudster and molester of women, that he is a misogynist, a racist and supporter of white supremacists, a chronic liar, a chaotic incompetent (demonstrated by his first term in office), a fool (such as pondering the internal use of disinfectants (2) to treat Covid), a threat to world peace and order, who undermines venerable domestic and international social and political institutions such as NATO, who is a foe of women’s rights and an impediment to climate action, who admires dictatorship, and who, by his own words, is a clear threat to the American Democracy itself. One wonders how so many people can support a person who threatens the foundation of the two-hundred-and-fifty year old American experiment in democracy and its – imperfect and uneven to be sure – struggle for development of the human potential.

     We know the story of Nazi Germany too well: a once-decent society consumed by hatred and the holocaust, with not only six million Jews exterminated, but also another five million Gypsies, Poles, communist, gay, lesbian, mentally ill, and developmentally disabled people murdered. Along with that was the worst war in history, with an estimated 75 to 80 million deaths (worldwide) – in Europe occurring under the rule of a megalomaniac who nevertheless many saw as a fool. The Germans were not an uncivilized people – quite the opposite. The Jewish people were not outsiders in German society of the time – again, quite the opposite. There was of course, a virulent strain of anti-Semitism concentrated in the higher echelons, propagated mainly by elitists, pseudo-scientific thinkers, and some artists at the time, such as the notorious racist, the composer Richard Wagner. But overall, the Jewish people were integrated into German society. How could this catastrophe have happened? How could decent Germans have allowed a person such as Hitler to take power in their democracy?

     Similarly, how could the decent American people allow a potential despot to take power in their democracy? In the end, this may be unanswerable. But there are themes:

1. Various constituencies believe the despot will represent their interests.

     Too many people in Weimar Germany considered Adolf Hitler to be an idiot who would be useful to them, someone who could be manipulated while he would protect their assets. And so it is that too many people in America consider Donald Trump as, at least, an unsavoury character, but as someone who will defend their interests and position. A common refrain among Trump supporters is that “I don’t like the man, but I like the policies.” This judgement is a terrible error and it is the same thing that groups of Germans thought about Hitler.

     Various communities of people, although they had a dim view of Hitler’s character, saw him as someone who would shield them from harm or loss. The conservative wealthy class and the managers of industry saw Hitler as a “performative” clown, but one who nevertheless would protect their wealth. Small business people and the self-employed, who felt their livelihoods were threatened, supported him. He appealed to the Catholics by his posing as someone who would defend Christian values. Likewise, he attracted the employed Protestant voters and domestic workers who felt secure in a rigid hierarchy with strong leadership. Of course, angry down-and-outers, accurately or not, saw in him someone who would recognize their victim-hood and help them our of their misery. Finally, there were those, the underground power-broker trolls of their day, like the Steve Bannons of our time, who wanted to tear down Germany society and establish strongman rule – although not by Hitler himself. They thought he would prove useful in the transition to autocracy but then could be disposed of and replaced by themselves.

     All these constituencies together formed a powerful coalition with adequate numbers to create a pathway to power for Hitler.

    The parallels are obvious. Somewhat unfairly, we Liberals often think of Trump supporters as rabble, donning red MAGA hats and yelling “lock her up” at his earlier rallies. But really these are disaffected people, many of whom have been harmed by long-term social and economic changes over which they have no power. Many are just angry working people partly disenfranchised by massive social and economic shifts. Trump appears to stand up for them by giving the finger to the more liberal, better-educated and self-satisfied establishment. The more outrageous and lawless he is, the better they like it; after all, they feel they have little left to lose.

     In addition to that group, there is a very sizeable number of Evangelicals who see Donald Trump as a “flawed messenger,” but who nevertheless stands for their values and issues, particularly their determination to have control over women’s sex and reproductive lives. Also, there are some Catholics who will vote for him because of his opportunistic opposition to abortion. There is a swath of the middle class whose position feels threatened by economic changes, the influx of immigrants, and seismic shifts in social values. To them, Trump is seen as a defender of both their way of life and their social position. Further, he provides, as Hitler did with the Jews, convenient scapegoats: Muslims, who are believed to threaten us with cultural change and terrorism, and migrants who are “not people” and who are “poisoning the blood” of the country. Add to this a fantasy – a promised return to a better, prouder time, the “Reich,” a time of power and glory – and you have a perfect, complementary emotional formula to focus the projections of those who are unhappy or afraid in the present. Make American Great Again.

     The conservative wealthy upper classes, knowing full well that Trump is a dishonest businessman who only dimly comprehends economics, nevertheless see him as someone who will work for them, ensuring that they will be well rewarded with tax-cutting, with libertarian policies, and with protection for entrenched interests such as the fossil fuel industries. Finally, there are those ready to tear down American democracy, from American proto-fascists like Steve Bannon (noted above) and Roger Stone, to radical libertarians like Peter Thiel and Elon Musk, to professional political power cynics like Mitch McConnell in the Senate , and all the way to lunatic fringe members of the Freedom Caucus in the House. To these people, Trump is the useful idiot, who can be put into service, and then outflanked, in establishing a new order.

     Underpinning all this, there is a powerful foundation of simple anti-black racism among white members all of the above groups; Trump has communicated clearly that he represents them.

     Add to all this the single-issue gun people and climate deniers, and those who will vote Republican no matter what, and you have a sizeable coalition. This fusion of interests into a collective, similar to 1933 Germany, might fall short of a popular majority, but it represents enough people to enable Trump to win the presidency, especially with spoiler candidates such as the befuddled Robert Kennedy in play.

2. The despot is an astute media player and has major media enablers.

     Donald Trump has been a brilliant player in the era of social media. I am certain that not a single day has gone by since June, 2015, when he announced his candidacy, that he has not been in the news. His very erraticism and unpredictability ensure that he garners attention and even his most abhorrent behaviours serve to promote him. He said it himself: “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot someone and I wouldn’t lose any voters, okay?” (3) Perhaps he underestimated himself here; if coverage of his criminal and other cases is an indication, he would not only not lose voters, but rather would gain them.

     Hitler was also a master of the media of the time. He exploited “sound recordings, newsreels, and radio,” and he even campaigned, theatrically dramatic for the era, by aeroplane. In this, he was supported and used by media moguls, such Alfred Hugenberg, who like right-wingers of our time, imagined a media bias against conservatism. Hugenberg, like Rupert Murdoch of Fox News, and the likes of Tucker Carlson with Trump, capitalized on Hitler’s persona despite privately thinking he was “manic.” Hugenberg used Hitler to promulgate “catastrophic politics” with inflammatory news, and a disinformation campaign of “half-truths, rumours, and outright lies.” His goal, like the Murdochs, was to promulgate culture wars, divide the society, and polarize politics, in order to preclude a socially progressive consensus. Like Trump in the present, Hitler was seen as a useful actor in promoting this destructive agenda. Of course, once entrenched in the chancellorship, Herr Hitler took that agenda to extremes that even Hugenberg and others could not imagine.

3. Decent people believe that their playing by the rules will contain the despot.

     Democracy is vulnerable and fragile, as indeed, is civilization itself. As Goebbels famously said: “The big joke on democracy is that it gives its mortal enemies the tools to its own destruction.” In order to work, democracy’s inherent untidiness has to be supported by people of good will and good faith, who agree to play by both the letter and the intention of the rules. The decent left, centre, and right of present-day America, and other democracies like Canada, the U.K., and The Netherlands, are prone to a belief that if they, themselves, continue to work fairly within it, the democratic system inevitably will protect against the lawless players. But this is a fallacy that the populist demagogue exploits at will. Hitler used this delusion to advantage, as did Senator McCarthy two decades later in America. Trump, even more bold-faced, has publicly promised to use the system against itself, for example by employing the Justice Department against his political enemies generally and Joe Biden personally if he is elected president.

      Earlier on, the first line of defence in the U.S. against Trump populism would have been the Republican Party itself, but unfortunately the party has been following a long arc of decline in political ethics.(4) In the Trump era, decent Republicans, from very conservative like Liz Cheney to the moderately so like Mitt Romney, have either been railroaded from the party or have run for the hills themselves, unable or unwilling to subject themselves to the virulent onslaught. Too many of those who are left are fawning minions like Lindsey Graham, destructionists such as Matt Gaetz, the unhinged like Marjorie Taylor-Greene, and cynical manipulators of power such as Elise Stefanik and the previously noted Mitch McConnell.

4. Decent people believe the motivations of the despot are like their own.

     A second fallacy of decent people is that they assume that someone like a Hitler is motivated by the same, normal things that they are: wanting to make things better, wanting to help, enjoying being liked by others for doing good, and being part of the human community. The normal person wants to avoid wrongdoing and does not want to feel shame or guilt. Decent people assume that the demagogue will respond to these things and feel good when they do right, and feel shame when they do wrong. But this is wrong. These normal motivations simply to not apply to a Hitler or a Trump – people with psychopathic and narcissistic character structures. A person with the psychopathic traits (5) easily exploits the decency and normal motivation of regular people – as easily as he takes advantage of the vulnerabilities of political systems. He sneers at normal people, considering them inferior, or as Trump calls them, “losers.”

     Much has been written of the character structure of Adolf Hitler (6), and certainly it is true that after-the-fact psychiatry can be all too facile and glib. Nevertheless, it is easy to see the psychopathy of Hitler, and to see that he was motivated by rage, and a desire to wreak upon the world his hatred and need for destruction. He lacked a conscience and empathy: these, the penultimate indicators of the psychopath. Further, obviously he craved attention and admiration: signifiers of the narcissist. There is no need to peer inside the psyche or to analyse his childhood in order to see these things; they are in plain sight. Hitler was a psychopath with narcissistic traits.

     Similarly, Donald Trump’s narcissism and psychopathy are in plain sight, in his words and deeds. However in his case, it would be fair to reverse the sequence and describe him as narcissistic, with psychopathic tendencies. His primary motivation is his need for admiration and attention. He craves notice and tolerates only fawning acclaim from those around him and from the public. Hence, his favourite moments on earth are his rallies. When admiration falters or is withdrawn, as a narcissist he lashes out and dismisses the transgressor. “Pathetic,” he called Nikki Haley. (7) These moments alternate with episodes of farcical self-aggrandisement – he has proclaimed himself the most “presidential” of Presidents since Abraham Lincoln. (8)

     However, his character structure does include psychopathic components of rage and hatred; life is about dominance, and winning. Others, even a venerable war hero and public servant, like John McCain, are “losers” – in this case because he “lost” by becoming a prisoner of war, after being captured serving his country in combat. (9) Trump never admits defeat, never admits errors, exploits others, and exhibits a lack of conscience and empathy. Still, his destructive rage is not primary, as it was in Hitler. He would not necessarily embark on a program to exterminate groups of people, as Hitler did. He is racist to be sure, but likely does not care that much about these people, as long as he is getting attention and admiration. His demonizing of migrants and Muslims is mostly opportunistic, a way to capture notoriety.

     It is, perhaps, psychological hair-splitting to discuss whether narcissism or psychopathy is primary in these two people. Whichever way around it is, the narcissistic-psychopathic pairing in character structure is dangerous: dangerous to those around the person, and dangerous to the society. And in the case of the U.S., this person with the personality disorder is a clear threat not only to the decency and civility of the nation, but also to the Democracy itself.

 

The strength of American democratic institutions is greater than that of the post-world-war Weimar Republic, and Trump is no Hitler, exactly. Perhaps Mussolini would be a more apt comparison in character and deportment. But make no mistake: he is a very dangerous aspiring despot and conditions are ripe for the ascent of such a person. We should not be complacent or deceived. The parallels with the rise of Hitler are apparent. The means to subvert democracy are available and there is a broad coalition of people who believe Trump will protect their interests. The candidate is adept at media use and there are media players who capitalize on this. This candidate with a narcissistic-psychopathic character structure is an admirer of dictators and a would-be dictator himself, and there is a cadre of determined enablers, with plans prepared, that is ready to enable their useful idiot. As Isaac Arnsdorf has reported, Steve Bannon, for instance, one of Trump’s handlers, has a detailed plan for at least one-hundred years of rule by a gang of MAGA proto-fascists. (10)

     Trump does not need to seize power. All he has to do is be elected, and then be allowed to consolidate. If he can be defeated at the polls, it will be a bumpy ride, but he will go away, and the road will be clearer to protect against the next Trump. If he is not defeated at the polls, then it will be up to all of us, and to every decent person who believes in democracy, to oppose, to challenge, and to stop him, by whatever peaceful and lawful means we have available to us. (11)

     Meanwhile, what to do about the discomfort with my fellow citizens and my neighbours? Part of me, of course, just wants to flee. But it would be hard to do so in good conscience. The right thing to do is to stay and resist tyranny. In any case, we truly are one world, and there really is no escape from these people. Canada has its opportunistic, “populist” prime ministerial candidate, Pierre Poilievre. The Netherlands has Geert Wilders; France has Marine Le Pen, Italy has Giorgia Meloni, and Hungary, Viktor Mihály Orbán. They are everywhere, and this is not to mention Presidents Putin and Xi Jinping, Min Aung Hlaing of Myanmar, Nicolás Maduro Moros of Venezuela, and all the other tin-pot dictators the world over. No, there is no escape; the only way forward is to stay and fight.

     The simple truth is that I just have to live with the disquiet I feel, and know that I am not alone in this. Kathy and I meditate; and every evening, she lights candles for peace on the dining room table. I take solace in knowing that there are very many good people out there in this country. Although the Supreme Court has become an unreliable protector of democracy, I know that if the man is elected, the good states, such as New York, Massachusetts, Vermont, Connecticut, New Jersey, California, Oregon, Washington, Illinois, will fight to resist the despot.

     I also know that there are also many decent people who will vote for Trump. I have to accept that they have their reasons. To live with that, I can only adopt a Buddhist take on it. They are not bad people; they are just mistaken. As to my gun-toting neighbours: I can’t offer friendship, but I can offer peace. For now, their banners are down, the flag is upright, and there has been no shooting for a long time. Maybe they have had an epiphany and realize that the man is no good. We will see what they do.

     I can only hope for the best, while preparing for the worst. And prepare to resist. To fight.

____________

After-note:

I find it depressing to write about this man, and I hope not to do so again.

Sources:

Evans, Richard J. The Coming of the Third Reich. Penguin Books, 2003.

Gopnik, Adam. The Enablers. The New Yorker Magazine, March 25, 2024

Ryback, Timothy W. Takeover: Hitler’s Final Rise to Power. Knopf, 2024.

Notes:

1. The historical analysis of the rise of Hitler here is entirely dependent upon the review by Adam Gopnik in The New Yorker Magazine, and on Timothy Ryback’s book, both listed above. Most quotations are from Gopnik.

2. President Trump Task Force Briefing. C-Span, April 23, 2020. Retrieved from: https://www.c-span.org/video/?471458-1/president-trump-coronavirus-task-force-briefing. 

3. Flores, Reena. Donald Trump: I could shoot someone and not lose any voters. CBS News, January 26, 2016. Retrieved from: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-i-could-shoot-somebody-and-i-wouldnt-lose-any-voters/. 

4. Milbank, Dana. The Destructionists: The Twenty-Five-Year Crack-Up of the Republican Party. Doubleday, 2022.

5. I do not use the term, “Antisocial Personality Disorder,” from the current Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association. The Committee has whitewashed the diagnosis; it sounds like someone who doesn’t like social gatherings much, as opposed to an inhuman character structure that lacks a conscience and any empathy and is prone to interpersonal abuse and often violence. That is a psychopath: not someone who is “antisocial.”

6. See, for example: Martin-Joy, John. Erik Erikson: A Psychoanalyst Looks at Hitler. Psychology Today, July 28, 2020. Retrieved from: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/politics-psychiatry-and-psychoanalysis/202007/erik-erikson-psychoanalyst-looks-hitler. 

7. Moran, Lee. Donald Trump’s ‘Pathetic’ Excuse For D.C. Primary Loss To Haley Is Mercilessly Mocked. Huffington Post, March 4, 2024. Retrieved from: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/donald-trump-responds-nikki-haley-defeat_n_65e5743ce4b0f89059333258. 

8. Cillizza, Chris. Donald Trump ranked himself 2nd on a list of most ‘presidential’ presidents. The Point, CNN, July 26, 2017. Retrieved from: https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/26/politics/donald-trump-abe-lincoln/index.html. 

9. Associated Press. Fact check: Trump says he never called John McCain a ‘loser.’ He definitely did. Chicago Tribune, September 5, 2020. Retrieved from: https://www.chicagotribune.com/2020/09/05/fact-check-trump-says-he-never-called-john-mccain-a-loser-he-definitely-did/.

10. Pengelly, Martin. New book details Steve Bannon’s ‘Maga movement’ plan to rule for 100 years: Isaac Arnsdorf’s Finish What We Started shows how the strategist wanted to create a dominant coalition to take US political power. The Guardian, April 4, 2024. Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/04/steve-bannon-book-maga.

11. Over 20% (28% of Republicans, 12% of Democrats) agree that violence may be necessary to “get the county back on track.” Santhanam, Laura. 1 in 5 Americans think violence may solve U.S. divisions, poll finds. PBS News Hour, April 3, 2024. Retrieved from: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/1-in-5-americans-think-violence-may-solve-u-s-divisions-poll-finds.

Revised April 29. 2024.

The Malarkey Scale

Posted on by Peter Scott Cameron

Malarkey (mel-ŏr´kē) n. Slang. Exaggerated or foolish talk, usu. intended to deceive. (1)

Picture Joe Biden’s big blue 2019 campaign bus: NO MALARKEY! Mostly the slogan was derided, seen as antiquated, out of touch, and reflective of Joe’s advanced age. (2) However, many of us, usually oldsters, enjoyed it and understood it immediately, having endured the four chaotic years of the previous scurrilous occupant of the White House. There is some truth to the charge that it was antiquated, but that makes it even better! It is exactly the word we need to describe what we are all wading in, in our so-called “information” age. (3)

     Let me challenge, right here, those younger who would mock the word. I would say, if we old-timers have been expected to learn strange terms in our old age such as what gnarly means to a skateboarder, what gaslighting, ghosting, doxxing and catfishing mean to social media addicts, to understand what fetch means when uttered by a mean girl, or even that a really hot girl is one who wears no undergarments so as to better display her attributes – well, then, younger people should be expected to understand and use English.

     Hearken, kids: you should know what it means to peregrinate, what it is to be purblind, what chicanery involves, what sort of raiment a person is wearing, what it is to twattle, and how it is to feel crapulous after over-indulgence the night before. You should know the difference between someone being indefatigable as opposed to indomitable; they are similar, but not the same, certainly. And, for good measure, speaking as a retired professor who has graded too many papers, you should know where apostrophes go, rather than just sprinkling them on the page like confetti.

     Thus I think we owe Joe Biden kudos for his effort to revive this wonderful and useful word. In this age of distorted public discourse, social media prevarication. marketing nonsense, public relations impression management, public figure pontificating, not to mention outright lying and disinformation, we need a good word to describe it all. That word is malarkey.

     Of course, there are other words for it, as the Princeton University philosopher, Harry G. Frankfurt (1929 – 2023) described earlier. (4) Uncle Joe, though, is too circumspect and civil to have used NO BULLSHIT! on the side of his bus. The other guy, who is a much cruder and more primitive fellow, might do such, although he would be lying, of course. There are other terms; one might use “humbug” for example. Malarkey is richer, however, because it includes considerations of degree – quantity and quality – as well as consciousness vs. unconsciousness, and matters of intent. Humbug is a much simpler concept. It is mere humbug to say that the country is under the guidance of divine providence, for example, but if this is taken further, it becomes malarkey. An example would be to claim that the aforementioned providence entitles citizens to believe that they are especially selected, and have the right to exceptional privilege, usually at the expense of others.

     There are many kinds of malarkey (also spelled malarky – feel free) and the concept has important dimensions that are worth considering. Doing so leads inevitably to a Malarkey Scale: a rough measurement of the size, the qualities, and the impact of a particular piece of malarkey. Is it a little fib or a whopper? Is the intention relatively harmless, or does it seek to rob others of their well-being? Is its impact negligible or does it cause untold damage in a number of areas of civil life? That is, is it only an unconsciously believed small bit of nonsense that does little harm, or is it a monstrous lie, deliberately crafted, that harms many powerless people or helpless creatures?

     For example, it could be as harmless as the idea that not wearing your rubbers in the rain will give you a cold. Or it could be as malevolent – albeit comically preposterous, of course – as Marjorie Taylor Greene’s claim that the California wildfires of a couple of seasons ago were caused by Jews firing lasers from outer space (in order to clear the way for a Jewish-financed high-speed rail project). You see the difference: we are talking about the size, the intention, and the consequences – each of which exist in degrees on a scale. Based on these dimensions, a piece of malarkey may qualify for one M, or it may deserve two (M M), three (M M M) or even four (M M M M) Malarkeys.

 

The first component is of course, size: how much actual balderdash there is in a particular manifestation of malarkey? Is it a tiny bit of nonsensicality, say, such as the idea that dreams predict the future? (More on this later.) If so, it probably will qualify for just one M. In many cases, although consequences are a separate consideration (see below), these tend to do little harm, and may even do a bit of good. I should mention that these constitute much of what we consider as “common sense,” which is to say, shared cultural understandings, accepted at face value, but that have no inherent relationship to reality. Some of these could just as easily be referred to as humbug.

     A good example of this would be the pronouncement, most often made to teenagers, that “you can be whatever you want to be.” It is part of the constellation of common-sense American mythology and is a satisfying bit of folderol that can even be quite useful. It can be used, for example, to inspire Junior to stop watching TicTok videos of partly-clad young girls dancing, and instead get up off the couch and do something meaningful like studying mathematics or trying out for the hockey team. But it is not exactly correct, of course. True, with a reasonable I. Q., a bit of luck, a good education, and if one did the requisite ten thousand hours of study and work, one could accomplish a lot in almost any field. Nevertheless, you may not become the next Marie Curie, Max Weber, or Eric Clapton. You may just end up being an social media influencer. Still, you are a better person for having tried.

     So, the above, even if it is a bit of hooey, has a grain of useful inspirational legitimacy in it. But the idea can be inverted and used to do damage, thereby qualifying for more than one M. An inversion can be, and is often, used to shame and unjustly blame people for their predicament. For example, there is an entire ideology that has been created that condemns the poor for their plight, thereby justifying stultifying inequality and rationalizing a half-hearted social safety net. It denies the reality of the structural nature of mass poverty, both domestic and colonial, in our consumer-capitalist society. (5) We say that the poor are poor because it is their fault; they’re lazy etc. True in some cases, of course, but it is mostly poppycock that makes us feel better about ourselves when we have more wealth. I would point out just one fact and then let it go at that. The large majority of poor families in North America have at least one member working full-time, full-year, often more than one job. (6) That is a structural problem, not a failure of the person.

     This brings us to the second dimension then: intention of the malarkey-spreader. Is the person intending to deceive and thereby to harm others? Is he or she benefiting, consciously or not, from promulgating the malarkey? Is the intention to benefit, psychologically, socially, or materially usually at some cost to others? Again, it is a matter of degree. We oldsters might criticize the music of younger people because it makes us feel better while we are dealing with our arthritis or musing about our youthful hotness that has gone AWOL. This is minor: there is no harm done and their music isn’t that bad. We really don’t mean to hurt them and the young people certainly don’t feel hurt. After all, they don’t really care about our musical opinions.

     On the other hand, the malarkey could be the malicious work of, say, an Andrew Tate, the purveyor of toxic masculinity, deliberately propagating hateful ideas to a large Internet following. He provides poisonous ideology to impressionable young men, amplifying their ignorance and feeding their misogyny so that…well, so that he can be somebody. And so that he can abuse vulnerable women. And so that he can drive expensive, fast cars. Pathetic really, but there it is: a developmentally delayed boy-man, propagating harmful claptrap with the full-on intention to harm others for personal gain. This makes his malarkey monstrous.

     Finally, the third dimension is: consequences. Does spreading the malarkey do no, or little harm? Belief that the world is flat, for example, does no harm. Nobody cares, and usually the belief has no effect – and if it does have an upshot, it is positive: that is, providing beneficial amusement to others.

     But the consequences of some malarkey can be catastrophic. Think blaming immigrants for crime as Trump did when he entered office and is doing so again this year (in fact, crime rates among immigrants are consistently lower than in the host population). (7) Trumpery, indeed. Think of (Trump again) the failure to condemn white supremacists after the Charlottesville demonstration and the murder-by-car of Heather Heyer, and later, in 2020, of his message to the Proud Boys, to “stand down and stand by.” It was an endorsement of the group and their cause, and they were thrilled and encouraged. (8) Think of Hitler blaming Jews for the political and economic woes of Weimar Republic. Enough said.

    There you have it in assessing malarkey: the size or scale or degree of the lie, the intention, and the consequences. This leads quite naturally to the Malarkey Scale, as follows:

1. Minor Malarkey M:

     This involves a smaller lie, just some flapdoodle made usually without intention to harm others, and the consequences are quite minor. I was, for example, in teaching about the sleep and dreaming cycle in psychology, surprised at how many students claimed not only that dreams predicted the future, but that they, themselves, had experienced such a prognosticating function resulting from the activation of random neurons in the brain stem during rapid-eye-movement sleep. It is untrue, of course, but there is no intention to harm another, and the effects, other than the believer sounding a bit silly, are inconsequential: just one M.

2. Moderate Malarkey M M:

     This level of malarkey involves a greater degree of fibbing, possibly in more that one direction. The intention may not necessarily involve directly harming others, but there is definitely some intention to get something from or put something over on someone, for personal gain. One common example is the claim to psychic powers. One of our regional newspapers used to feature a column by someone claiming to be a pet psychic. She would tell you what your pet was thinking and even could tell you how Fido was doing beyond the grave. She could gather these “insights” just from the letter you sent her – no need to meet Buddy or hold a seance in person! A clever bit of gimcrackery, of course. Often the proponents of this kind of malarkey claim no intention to deceive and may even believe their own flim-flam. But deceive they do, with the benefit of either appearing more special than the next person, or having gainful employment (such as a clairvoyant column-writer) or both. The consequences are usually light: not much harm is done most of the time. I enjoy a good astrology column myself, and I make sure to get fortune cookies with my Chinese take-out, though I would not want to become delusional and start thinking there was anything to these things.

3. Major Malarkey M M M:

     This involves a bigger lie, sometimes even a whopper, and the intention is usually to harm others, or at least separate people from their autonomy, power, and/or money. Most advertising is this: the major lie is the claim that this product will somehow magically make one happy. Research clearly shows that this is never really the case once you are above a basic level of material well-being. But the sleight of hand connecting greater material possession with happiness is accomplished masterfully; your fundamental human emotions, and your desires for experiences like relationship, love and sensuality are cleverly linked, that is, psychologically associated with material objects though a vicarious conditioning process. The intention is to rob you of your money, of course. The consequences of this marketing ballyhoo can be quite serious: the dead-end pursuit of endless material satisfaction, slavery to a paycheque, resulting over-consumption of resources and production of waste, and even, for some, an emptiness in living, that is, the old ennui. Three Malarkeys for this existential lie: M M M !

     Some codswallop might otherwise qualify for four Malarkeys because of its maliciousness, but the fabrication is so outlandish, unbelievable, and moronic as to make it otherwise completely laughable. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s previously noted claim of Jewish outer space lasers is such an example, as well as the entire Q-Anon conspiracy theory, to which the congresswoman also adheres, by the way. (9) The scale of the bunkum would ordinarily lead them to be considered as M M M M. However, these theories are so outlandish that the harm to public discourse is somewhat curtailed in that nobody in their right mind would believe them, which leads to, of course, the non compos mentis factor – the dispensers of this baloney have lost contact with reality, and therefore most likely do not understand what they are doing and what the consequences are. Some allowance must be made here, although certainly these people should not be elected to positions of public responsibility or leadership.

4. Monstrous Malarkey M M M M:

     This is the worst level of tommyrot. Racism is M M M M. Misogyny is M M M M. The lies are huge, the intention is to exploit, disempower and oppress others, or worse, and the consequences are very damaging, if not catastrophic. In addition, the charlatan is of a sane state of mind: that is, not delusional, although usually psychopathic, like Steve Bannon or Roger Stone, both sycophants of Donald Trump. Trump’s “stolen election” bunkum qualifies as Monstrous Malarkey on all fronts: degree of nonsense, intention and state of mind, with tremendous consequences. The twaddle that the election was stolen is entirely untrue – so outlandish, with all the investigations, evidence, court cases and the like as to no longer require refutation, if it ever did. The intention is absolutely clear: to seize power, not only undeservedly, not only illegally, but immorally. The state of mind of the perp is clear: he is a psychopath, without conscience. The consequences for America are catastrophic: the undermining, and if successful in this return election engagement of 2024, even the unwinding of the two-century-plus experiment in civil democracy. M M M M !

     Monstrous Malarkey is so nefarious, so odious, that one might think that another, more dramatic word is called for, but at the bottom of it is classic malarkey. And so, I stick with the term.

 

America is in its long, tortuous election year and so we have to expect to be eyeball-deep in malarkey this year. There will be plenty of malarkey in Canada, too, which will have an election in 2025, if not before. Consider: Canada’s banking system is considered one of the best, most stable in the entire world. (There was no melt-down in 2008; the Canadian banks did not participate in the mortgage follies that preceded the crash.) However, the leading opposition candidate, Pierre Poilievre, who is likely to be the next prime minister, has proposed getting rid of the Bank of Canada and that the country go big into cryptocurrency. Go figure. And the current premiere of the oil province of Alberta, Danielle Smith, after the past year when Canada pretty much went up in smoke as a result of cumulative climate change problems, has implemented a moratorium on the development of…wait for it…renewable energy! Ah…well, go figure.

     Still, the situation is less dangerous there right now than it is immediately in the U. S. In this country, the very democracy is at stake; at the same time, we are drowning in hogwash, disinformation, law-breaking, and fraud in the political sphere. It will get worse with the use of artificial intelligence, which will make dupery much easier to carry off, and much more difficult to discern.

     Overall, “only” one-third of Americans believe the 2020 the fraud perpetrated by Trump, that the election was stolen; however that translates to close to seventy percent of Republicans who believe this hokum. (10) It also leads, incredibly, to a sizeable proportion of the population who intend to vote for the fraudster who inspires unbelievable loyalty, like a Mafia Don, and who aspires to dictatorship. The danger is grave, indeed.

     My hope is that the Malarkey Scale presented here is helpful in identifying and assessing what we are facing – and ultimately in overcoming it. One hopes that intelligence, rationality, and sanity will prevail over the dark forces, and that in the long run, good will prevail. In the meantime, what specifically can we do? The simplest and most direct thing, when we hear, read, or see something, is to ask: is it true? Is it true, for example, that immigrants have a higher crime rate than native people? Then we dig in and find out from real, objective sources.

     And finally, we all must thank Joe Biden for reminding us about the power and menace of malarkey – and for the need to be straight and true, to the best of our abilities. I, for one, would like to see the slogan go back on the bus. 

____________________________

1. ITP Nelson Canadian Dictionary of the English Language: An Encyclopedic Reference. Thompson Canada Limited, 1997.

2. Yglesias, Matthew. “No Malarkey,” Joe Biden’s unabashedly lame new slogan, explained. Vox, December 3, 2019, https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/12/3/20991841/joe-biden-no-malarkey. Accessed January 26, 2023. 

3. An equally or possibly more legitimate term would be the “disinformation age.”

4. Frankfurt, Harry G. On Bullshit. Princeton University Press, 2005.

5. Desmond, Mathew. Poverty, By America. Random House, 2023.

6. Carl, John, and Marc Bélanger. Think Sociology. 2nd Canadian ed., Pearson, 2013.

7. Fact check: Immigration doesn’t bring crime into U.S., data say. PBS News Hour, February. 3, 2017, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/fact-check-immigration-doesnt-bring-crime-u-s-data-say. Accessed January 23, 2024. 

8. Subramanian, Courtney, and Jordan Culver. Donald Trump sidesteps call to condemn white supremacists — and the Proud Boys were ‘extremely excited’ about it. USA Today. September 29, 2020, https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/09/29/trump-debate-white-supremacists-stand-back-stand-by/3583339001/. Accessed January 23, 2024. 

9. Begs the question: how did this person ever get elected to Congress?

10. Kamisar, Ben. Almost a third of Americans still believe the 2020 election result was fraudulent. NBC News, Meet the Press Blog, June 20, 2023, https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meetthepressblog/almost-third-americans-still-believe-2020-election-result-was-fraudule-rcna90145. Accessed January 24, 2024. 

Copyright © Peter Scott Cameron, 2024

Good News 1: Gun Control

Posted on by Peter Scott Cameron

As we start 2024, given the rather dreary year just past (wars, a tough year for climate, and a record number of mass shootings in the U.S. etc.) I thought it would be helpful to start the new year with some good news.(1)

     On the issue of gun control in the U.S.: despite a Supreme Court crackpot majority that seems bent on ensuring continuing mayhem (2) – with a preponderance of members stuck in the eighteenth century, dreaming of the day that men’s breeches are fashionable once more (or in the case of one member, petticoats) – Blue and Blue-ish States have seized the initiative. These may be baby steps, and they will be challenged in lawsuits brought forth by gun boneheads and the big money that backs them, but still they show sanity, courage, humanity, and a willingness of Legislators to take on powerful, monied interests.

1. California, Oregon, and Illinois have passed new “red flag” laws, enabling risk protection orders that allow gun possession prohibitions for people who have already demonstrated a strong potential for violence. It can be difficult to predict violence, of course, but still it is common sense to strip a previously violent person of his (usually his) guns, or someone who is threatening to kill his ex – or anyone who is menacing, for that matter. Duh.

2. Governor Newsom in California signed legislation that prohibits carrying concealed guns in twenty-six public places, including churches (!), parks (!!), and playgrounds (!!!). Of course, why people are allowed to carry concealed weapons – or open carry, for that matter – anywhere, anytime in a civil society, boggles my mind. Call me crazy if you will, but I just think we are all better off without jokers walking around carrying guns in public. But maybe that is just me: too rational, I suppose, and I’ve done therapy so that my childhood developmental issues are minimal. Anyway, go Guv, good on ya!

3. A ban on the sale of many semiautomatic assault weapons, including AK-47s and AR-15s, went into effect on New Year’s day in Illinois. I know, I know, the banning of AR-15s etc. will cramp the style of lawful squirrel hunters in the State, but hey! We all have to give a little for the common good.

4. Colorado has also banned kit and ghost guns (home-made, with no serial numbers). This logically would include plastic guns made with 3-D printers. Pro-gun dunderheads have already brought a lawsuit claiming this infringes on personal liberty to…well, to do whatever the hell they want, I suppose. But I am hopeful that even this High Court will see the wisdom here, understanding the difference between a flood of untraceable, lethal-impact weapons in a predominantly urban, high-population Civitas, versus a society that was low-density and agrarian and in which the main weapons were muskets or single-shot muzzle-loaders, along with hay forks.

5. Just prior to 2023, our good New York Governor Hochul signed legislation that took several steps, some small to be sure, but with the main thrust restricting concealed carry in certain public locations – after the Supreme Court ludicrously struck down an effective one-hundred year old N.Y. law that restricted such carry outside the home. It never struck me as particularly good idea to allow the carrying, concealed or otherwise, of guns in bars, for example, although the Supreme Court apparently thinks this is an okay idea. Go, Guv!

     So! Small steps, to be sure, but significant nonetheless. Thank you to these States and their leaders. We mustn’t give up or give in, not for a moment. Our children and grandchildren depend on us. As good old Uncle Joe Biden might say: No More Malarkey!

Notes

1. Sadly, I would be remiss not to note the school shooting yesterday (January 4) in Iowa.

2. I understand “Originalism.” But this idea is Big Malarkey. The American Constitution and its amendments are not sacred texts that came down from the mountaintop on tablets. Rather, these constitute a powerful yet living, guiding document that must be interpreted and reinterpreted in light of both past and current social and historical contexts. 

Sources

Governor Hochul Announces New Concealed Carry Laws Passed in Response to Reckless Supreme Court Decision Take Effect September 1, 2022. August 31, 2022, https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-hochul-announces-new-concealed-carry-laws-passed-response-reckless-supreme-court. Accessed January 4, 2024.

Marcos, Coral Murphy. New gun safety laws take effect around the U.S. after over 650 mass shootings in 2023. The Guardian, January 1, 2024.

Global Burning: It’s Personal

Posted on by Peter Scott Cameron

Climate change is personal. I have seen it first-hand. More than a decade ago I travelled up to my hometown in Northern Ontario, the land of lakes, rivers, and pine forests. It was as savage and beautiful as always. I had a small aluminum boat in tow, with a ten-horsepower outboard motor on it, and my one-man canoe on top. I drove the few miles out of town to Lake Kenogami, where I had spent idyllic summers on the lake, swimming, fishing, and wandering its miles of blue water, and exploring the river at both ends: The Blanche.

     As a boy, alone and with childhood chums, I boated along the river, especially at the west end, which was wilder: a land of beavers, muskrats, herons, and if you were lucky, a moose or a black bear on the shore. At points in the river you would have to drag your boat over the sturdy beaver dams, strong enough to hold you, your pal (if he was with you), and your boat as you pulled it over. For a boy, it was as close to heaven as you could get on this earth. When I bite the big one, this is where I want my ashes to be scattered.

     This day, I put my boat in near the bridge over Highway 11, at the two-story wooden Kenogami Hotel (renamed later in our more pretentious age, “The Kenogami Bridge Inn”), and before heading onto the lake I motored a half-mile east on that part of the Blanche. My outboard hit two rocks on route – this might otherwise mean nothing, but despite all the years that had gone by, I still knew the river and how to navigate it. It meant the river was much lower than it used to be: it least a foot lower, by my estimate.

     I returned to the lake and moved up its length, stopping by the shore of “our” bay to look at our small log cottage now apparently relegated to a sleep cabin or storage shed. Then I stopped for a while at “my” island, a small, pine and moss-covered rock island about fifty feet long, where I had camped as a boy. With the lowered water, my old landing slip was now a rocky outcrop. When young, I would stay a day or two, skinny-dipping in the cool water, and fishing for pickerel. From the island, there were no cottages and no people to see. I had enormous freedom, but there were rules: if camping overnight, we had to go in pairs, each boy with a boat in case of problems, and once a day we had to check in at home. We’d build a fire and cook the fish we caught, eating it with tea that we brewed. At night, in our tiny pup-tents, we would fall asleep to the hallucinatory calls of the loons.

     After visiting my island, I continued another mile or so, to the point were the Blanche joined the lake at its western end. But I could not find the river mouth. There was no obvious inlet for the river water flowing south and east from Sesekinika Lake. Instead, there was a reedy area, with numerous rivulets – a marshy shoreline; somewhere behind that had to be the river, assuming it still existed. I came back with my canoe the next day and still could not find a distinct inlet. I was unable to get to my beloved Blanche. (1) The reason is straightforward: changing climate had warmed the atmosphere, shortened the winter, and reduced the snow pack and the rainfall and the water level had fallen. What I had known was gone.

 

We all read about the fires in Canada last summer, and some of us saw it, albeit second-hand, at least in the form of an orange-brown haze over both Canadian and American cities – a haze that, where I live, in Northeastern New York, you could taste on some days. The haze made it all the way to Europe. The conflagration began in early spring, and since then there have been more than 6,500 fires. (2) As of November 9, there were still 412 fires, 119 of them out of control. (3) So far the fires have burned 18.5 million hectares (45.7 million acres). Many of the fires were large and fierce enough “to create their own weather via pyrocumulonimbus clouds, or ‘fire storm clouds,’ which can stretch 200 miles (320km) wide and carry ash and other debris upward and unleash lightning that can trigger multiple other fires that immolate more trees.” (4) This was in the vast boreal forest that makes up about a quarter of the world’s intact woodlands – the boreal forest of Canada is about the size of India.

     It is a disaster. The cause? Climate change. Forests have been weakened by the changes. Winters are shorter and not as cold. The snow-pack is not as deep and does not last as long and rainfall is less. Quite simply, the forest is entering a new age, an age of fire, because it is too dry.

     In August, I read a piece in the New York Times: it was heartfelt, a description by the writer of driving (presumably from New York, where he is a member of the Times editorial board) up though the Adirondacks, though the orange haze, past Montréal, where “the sun was reduced to a red spot,” and on to La Belle, Quebec where the author has a summer cottage. He goes on to describe the fire conditions and to lament the situation both in global terms, but also in terms of its affecting the serene beauty of the lake where he is observing and writing. (5)

     Yet, nowhere did he make a connection between his driving, for hundreds of miles, from his place of work to his cottage retreat. It – the fires, the haze, and all – appear to be just happening to the world and to him, giving him feelings like sorrow and wistfulness.

     But what about that drive? And how many times a season does he make it? How much carbon does he emit as a result?

     And what about me and my earlier trips to the hometown in Northern Ontario? Did I realize my contribution to climate change? I’d like to obfuscate and say “sort of,” but that would be a lie. I did realize. I – and we – have have been publicly aware of climate change since at least 1980. (6)  But I went anyway, just wanting to do what I wanted to do, including towing a boat behind my Jeep S.U.V. and carrying a wind-dragging canoe on top. So now: should I ever travel the five-hundred miles each way to go there again, even though I would like to? No, I think not.

 

Global burning is personal; yet, we continue to live as though it is not. We are observing effects and wringing our hands alright, but we continue to do whatever we do, while waiting for the technological and market fixes that will avert the disaster and avoid any personal inconvenience. But the simple truth is, even if we are marvellously ingenious, technical and market fixes will be too little, too late. These fixes will never be enough, in any case. In order to save the planet from the worst of climate change, we have to change our behaviour. We have to change how we live.

     But I see few signs that we are willing to change. Instead, I see us continuing to build gigantic McMansions, when much smaller houses would do. I see more and more huge pickups and sports utility vehicles barrelling along the road (Ford discontinued selling standard sedans and small hatchbacks in North America in 2020, in favour of trucks). (7) I see people flocking back to travel after the pandemic, flying all over the place and packing themselves onto cruise ships. (8) Consumption, from cheap fast fashion to over-priced iPhones, shows no sign of moderation.

      This summer I was alarmed to see, on numerous occasions, locked vehicles idling in the grocery store parking lot. People were going in to shop and leaving their cars running (for 15 minutes? A half-hour? An hour?) with the air-conditioner on so that the car would be cool when they came out. The hottest summer, caused by climate change, and that is the response? Unbelievable.

     We just don’t get it.

     Of course, governments and corporate rascals are backtracking, too. Oil companies like B.P. and Exxon are quietly stepping back from previously set climate goals. The U.K.’s Conservative Sunak government announced, in September, a rollback of established climate goals and actions. Incredibly, Daniel Smith, the Alberta Premier, has imposed a moratorium (!) on renewable energy projects in that dirty oil (tar sands) province. Even good old Uncle Joe Biden is persisting in developing the Willow oil-drilling project in Alaska, despite otherwise being a “green” president.

     The rascals certainly must be held accountable, but we also must be accountable to ourselves, to each other, to our children and to our grandchildren. We have to change our behaviour.

     I am someone who abhors telling others what to do and how to live, but this is an emergency: we know the drill.

     Live in smaller homes. If you have a second home, sell it or rent it to someone who needs a place to live. Get rid of the big trucks; drive a smaller, lighter, car, preferably a sedan. (9) If you need a truck or S.U.V., make it a smaller one like a Ranger or a Forester. Drive less; combine trips. Or just don’t go. Car pool to work, and work from home as much as you can. Don’t fly unless you have to. Take the train.  Don’t go on cruises; but if you absolutely must cruise, go every second year instead of yearly. Eat less meat. Reduce buying. Keep your clothes longer; repair items rather than replace wherever possible. Avoid buying and using plastic as much as you can. Substitute old lights with L.E.D bulbs. Replace an oil or gas furnace with a heat pump if you can afford it. Buy legitimate carbon offsets (research carefully). Give up NIMBY-ism and support wind and solar projects in your area. If you are in a market that permits it, purchase renewable electricity, even if it costs you more. Support your government to implement carbon pricing and taxes even when they affect you personally. The basic theme that is the foundation of all this? Individually, personally, reduce our consumption. Do what you can. If you need inspiration like I sometimes do, read Wendell Berry or Bill McKibben.

     I say all this because there is a simple reality. Yes, corporations and governments must change their ways – but they will not do so as long as demand for fossil fuel stays strong. Instead, they will merely posture, as Canada pretends, to pursue greenhouse gas reductions. (10) Put another way, countries and companies will not reduce their output of oil products until the demand diminishes. That is squarely in our hands. It is up to us.

     I know, I know, everybody hates a noodge and I understand my good readers are doing what they can. But we need to remind and refresh ourselves and each other and take action. This does create personal dilemmas; I get that. How often do I take the 800 mile round-trip to Toronto to see my grandchildren? Answer: less often. Otherwise the planet will burn up. It is that simple.

     The good news is that the list of what we can do personally is robust – it goes on and on. More good news also is that many young people are willing to make big changes like having fewer children and not owning a car to help salvage things. They are making smaller changes also, like cutting down meat and dairy, buying secondhand clothing, and riding a bike to work. (11) And some older people, even we, the high-consuming and greenhouse-gas emitting Baby Boomers, indicate that they care, at least.

     The climate situation is dire, but we must not allow ourselves to wallow in despair. There is still time. I am not without hope; nature, if not always human beings, inspires me.

 

Late yesterday afternoon I was standing in the middle of dirt road in front of our house (obviously the traffic is not too heavy here), gazing at the patterns of crystallizing ice in the little pond on the far side of the road, when I heard the bleating of Canada geese in the twilight sky. It took a while until I could see them, as their honking conversation grew louder and louder. When they came into sight – no kidding! I felt my heart swell and a lump in my throat at the sight of them. There were hundreds, just like the old days, in those disorganized flocks that you would see in the fall – some in masses and some in competing not-quite “V” shapes. They were yakking at each other, choosing leaders, talking it over, while practising for the big travel formations they will use to fly to the southerly states and to Mexico.

     I understand some geese no longer make the trip, as we continue to warm. But nevertheless I felt, then and there, that as long as some of these big, bleating, courageous birds are willing, then I, too, should be willing. I am obligated to do what I can do, to sacrifice a few things in gratitude for all that joy and well-being that I have been given, my whole life, ever since I wandered up the beautiful Blanche River as a boy. It is not too much to give back to our paradise. It is not too much to offer our sweet old Earth.

_________________________________________________

     Notes

1. See my poem, On the Blanche, written in the seventies, below this blog post. 

2. Milman, Oliver, and Andrew Witherspoon. After a year of record wildfires, will Canada ever be the same again? The Guardian, November 9, 2023, https://www.theguardian.com/world/ 2023/nov/09/canada-wildfire-record-climate-crisis. 

3. CIFFC Home. Canadian Interagency Forest Fire Centre Inc., https://ciffc.net/. Accessed November 9, 2023.

4. Milman and Witherspoon, op. cit. 

5. Schmemann, Serge. It Is No Longer Possible to Escape What We Have Done to Ourselves. New York Times. August 23, 2023. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/23/opinion/ canada-wildfires-climate-change.htmlopinion/canada-wildfires-climate-change.html. 

6. The first scientific publication concerning climate change potential was in 1896. The Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius publicized calculations showing that industrial age carbon dioxide emissions would warm the planet. By 1950, the scientific community was openly discussing the problem; even economists were aware of the issue by 1970. (See The Worldly Philosophers, by Robert Heilbroner.) By the 1980’s scientists were insisting that action had to be taken. This, of course, as we all know, was countered by a massive disinformation campaign managed by so-called “think tanks,”  funded by oil interests, such as Exxon – which in its own documents, showed it knew exactly what was happening with climate change. This was entirely successful in creating the false “controversy” we live with, and in delaying any real action for forty crucial years.

7. Even with electric vehicles and increased efficiencies, North America reduced yearly vehicle emissions by only 1.6% since 2010; had both the percentage of SUVs and trucks sold not increased, and the size and weight of these vehicles not exploded, the reduction during the period would have been over 30%. Horton, Helena. Motor emissions could have fallen by over 30% without S.U.V. trend, report says. The Guardian, November 24, 2023, https://www.the guardian.com/environment/2023/nov/24/motor-emissions-could-have-fallen-without-suv-trend- report.

8. The Oasis of the Seas uses one U.S. gallon of diesel every twelve feet; or to put it another way, the comparable Freedom of the Seas uses 28 thousand (U.S.) gallons of fuel every hour. This results in 626,640 pounds of carbon dioxide per hour. 

9. Electric vehicles are touted as the panacea; I am reserving judgement for now. They may help per-vehicle life-time emissions, but come with their own serious environmental issues, particularly the massive levels of mining for battery materials. Also, E.V.s only save emissions if the grid is green or nuclear; hardly the situation at this point. Battery recycling needs to be perfected. In any case, even the automobile companies privately admit that electric conversion of all those large trucks and S.U.V.s is unsustainable. The required battery weights are just too much and minimize potential emissions gains. But still…they can be a big step forward if the mining and electric grid problems are addressed, batteries are recycled, and there is a concerted effort to reduce the size of vehicles.

10. Naishadham, Suman, and Victor Caivano. Canada says it can fight climate change and be a major oil nation. Huge fires may force a reckoning. Los Angeles Times, November 10, 2023. https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2023-11-10/canada-says-it-can-fight-climate-change-and-be-major-oil-nation-massive-fires-may-force-a-reckoning. 

11. Henley, Jon, and Michael Goodier. Young Europeans more likely to quit driving and have fewer children to save planet. The Guardian, October 25, 2023. https://www.theguardian.com/ world/2023/oct/25/young-europeans-quit-driving-fewer-children-save-planet-climate-crisis. 

 

 

 

 

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.