dailykos--2020-09-11--How Trump Hurts Workers and Wins Their Votes

• A new deregulation gift from the Trump administration to Wall Street will hurt salaried workers and increase their support for Trump • Now private equity funds can prey on pension funds • A decade ago Warren Buffett exposed the con used by money managers to exploit clients , now confirmed by an Oxford University study It got little attention in the media , probably because it seems such a boring and inconsequential move .
Just another deregulation of a consumer protection rule following a Trump executive order .
Previously , pension funds were prohibited from investing in private equity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says anyone can buy shares in equity funds for their 401 ( k ) .
David Pears , a former investment banker , tells me the financial advisors are really pushing these for 401 ( k ) ’ s now .
Yet Another Rapid Upward Transfer of Wealth These private equity funds are already billionaire making factories for the managers .
In Financial Advisor Magazine , Tracey Longo describes their success : “ The biggest winners have been the founders of Blackstone , Apollo , KKR and Carlyle—the four largest private equity managers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the world ’ s 29th richest billionaire with a personal fortune of $ 17.7 billion , according to the annual Forbes list .
Leon Black ’ s $ 7.7 billion fortune ranks the Apollo founder at 63rd , while George Roberts ( $ 6.1 billion ) and Henry Kravis ( $ 6 billion ) come in at 108th and 112th ” respectively .
David Rubenstein , Carlyle co-founder , is in 275th place with an estimated wealth of $ 3.1 billion .
Longo quotes Professor Ludovic Phalippou of Oxford University who warns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the way from this seemingly innocuous deregulation : “ This wealth transfer from several hundred million pension scheme members to a few thousand people working in private equity might be one of the largest in the history of modern finance , ” Private equity funds were created so wealthy people could pool their money for better investment clout .
Mitt Romney ’ s former Bain Capital is one of the best-known .
These private equity funds ’ vaunted returns on investment for average investors are a hoax .
Numerous studies have proved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on index funds .
Equity funds tout their ability to pick killer investments that produce high returns to investors .
Sometimes they brag about 20 % or more per year .
Indeed if the calculation is made on a couple of their good years , the data may support such claims .
However that intrepid investor Warren Buffett exposed their lie .
He challenged any of these fund managers to beat the returns of an index fund over 10 years .
Only one dared to take up the challenge and lost .
Buffett @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in his 2007 annual letter to shareholders beginning on page 12 .
In his words : `` When trillions of dollars are managed by Wall Streeters charging high fees , it will usually be the managers who reap outsized profits , not the clients .
Both large and small investors should stick with low-cost index funds.
” [ His emphasis ] The situation is not new .
There ’ s an old story called the stockbroker customer yacht story .
Its use of ‘ customer ’ not ‘ client ’ shows for how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A stockbroker took a potential customer to the broker ’ s yacht club .
He proudly showed his mark all of his partners ’ yachts .
The insightful customer asked , ” But where are your customers ’ yachts ?
” Pears confirmed the ethic , “ In my entire 35 years management never asked me how my clients were doing .
Not once !
But every day I got a report on how much I made for the firm.
” In the following 13 years , other studies have confirmed Buffett ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Morning Star , reported the same finding .
And coincidentally , two months before Trump ’ s administration made equity funds available to money managers at pension funds , Phalippou had released an academic study proving , again , Buffet was right .
The professor ’ s title says it better than I ever could : An Inconvenient Fact : Private Equity Returns & The Billionaire Factory There is no stock picking in an index fund .
The ‘ index ’ refers to any of the stock market indexes such as Standard & @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to choose the best individual stocks , you ’ ll probably have some winners and some losers .
But if you look at the stock market in general , it usually goes up over time .
If you could take a sample of all of the stocks on the index , the winners and losers would cancel out , but you would end up with a net gain .
Buy and hold .
It ’ s a tortoise rather than a hare strategy .
You would need a fair sum to buy an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this article have a spare $ 50 million or so to properly execute the plan .
However , an index fund is a type of mutual fund .
When you buy into one , your money is pooled with other members so there ’ s enough money to buy an adequate sample of stocks on the index .
There ’ s no stock picking ; it ’ s completely passive .
Much lower commissions , much higher net returns for you .
Active fund managers charge a 2 % management fee , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fees—extra charges when you cash in at retirement .
Index funds have a very low fee and that ’ s another reason they are more profitable for clients .
Pears agrees that the active fund fees are excessive .
He says , “ I rationalized my fees on keeping my clients from making stupid mistakes , not from any brilliance or active management of portfolios.
” Now , that it has been proven well beyond any possibility of doubt that the fees paid to money managers are a complete waste of money , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ managers— but they don ’ t .
In his paper quoted above , Phalippou gives one reason : the pension boards are embarrassed to admit they have been conned for so long .
A more urgent reason why worker pension funds should fire their money managers : there is an inherent conflict of interest .
The money managers want to make the mostest the fastest for the sake of their commissions .
They often invest in corporations that have been taken over by hedge funds .
They know that these predators will strip @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other tactics that will eventually put the corporation into bankruptcy .
The corporate raiders will increase the amount available for dividends by underfunding worker pensions .
( Note : they always fund the executive pensions ) .
The workers then have to make a claim on the state pension funds– which are now in jeopardy .
Sears is a recent example where workers ’ pensions were sacrificed to dividends .
I explain how the hedge funds do this in my article : How Greedy Investors Looted Sears into Bankruptcy Here ’ s How @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and doctors have a fiduciary duty .
It 's a simple concept .
They ca n't use their professional expertise to take advantage of a client .
The professional must put the client 's interests above their own .
For example , if an accountant knows that a client does not understand how to read a financial statement and so doesn ’ t know the true value of their company , the accountant can not buy the shares of that company below value .
You might expect if someone called themselves a financial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ financial planner at a bank , they would have a similar duty— but they do n't .
One of the reforms of Dodd Frank put such a duty on financial advisors—but note this—only when giving advice about retirement investments .
As one of Trump 's first moves , he had Congress pass The Financial Choice Act which eliminated even this narrow fiduciary duty .
Financial advisors once again have open season on unsuspecting clients .
As these ‘ advisors ’ have no more obligations to you then a used car salesman , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ best commissions for them , not the best results for you .
Some financial advisors do accept a fiduciary duty , but you have to ask them if they do .
It ’ s such a minefield that one investment group put out an ebook on how to find a fiduciary in the financial advice field One way to check out an advisor , ask them about index funds .
If they disparage them , leave !
How It Will Help Trump The unnecessary management fees , especially the surprise trailer fees , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ retirees well have a whole lot less then they could have .
But they won ’ t know that until the distant future ; and they probably will never understand how they could ’ ve had so much more .
Even Trump haters will likely never see this upward siphoning of hard-earned income from their retirement savings .
Trump and the Republicans realize the the worse the economic times for the middle and working classes , the more they will blame what they can understand : jobs moving to China and immigrants coming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ less pay .
Phalippou shows an application of that famous insight by Sinclair Stevens that it ’ s hard to make a man see something if his income depends on his not seeing it .
“ Why are trustees , investment teams , external managers , consultants and others not seeing through this ?
Maybe because their livelihood depends on them not seeing it.
” It would be career suicide for them .
What should pension funds and investors planning for retirement do ?
Buffet gives some sound advice .
Here ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ letter to Berkshire shareholders : My advice to the trustee could n't be more simple : Put 10 % of the cash in short-term government bonds and 90 % in a very low-cost S & P 500 index fund .
( I suggest Vanguard 's . )
I believe the trust 's long-term results from this policy will be superior to those attained by most investors — whether pension funds , institutions or individuals — who employ high-fee managers In spite of the mounting evidence of the uselessness of money managers , pension @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rid of these money managers .
It will take a bottom-up workers revolt .
That would take education on these issues— note how that is not happening !
Acknowledgement : Thanks to retired banker and senior OpEd News editor David Pears for his input .
Jan D. Weir is a lawyer is a former partner in a large international law firm and has advised multi national corporations , banks and accounting firms .
He has taught business law at the University of Toronto , and is the co-author of The Essential Concepts of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ updates on laws that affect inequality on Twitter @ JanWeirLaw and at and Medium.com .

• A new deregulation gift from the Trump administration to Wall Street will hurt salaried workers and increase their support for Trump
• Now private equity funds can prey on average citizens planning for retirement
• A decade ago Warren Buffett exposed the con used by money managers to exploit clients, now confirmed by an Oxford University study
It got little attention in the media, probably because it seems such a boring and inconsequential move. Just another deregulation of a consumer protection rule following a Trump executive order. Previously, private squirt could not sell shares to people saving for retirement; now the Department of Labor says anyone can buy shares in equity funds for their 401(k). David Pears, a former investment banker, tells me the financial advisors are really pushing these for 401(k)’s now.
Yet Another Rapid Upward Transfer of Wealth
Yes, it’s a big deal.
These private equity funds are already billionaire making factories for the managers.
In Financial Advisor Magazine, Tracey Longo describes their success: “The biggest winners have been the founders of Blackstone, Apollo, KKR and Carlyle—the four largest private equity managers. Stephen Schwarzman, Blackstone co-founder, is the world’s 29th richest billionaire with a personal fortune of $17.7 billion, according to the annual Forbes list. Leon Black’s $7.7 billion fortune ranks the Apollo founder at 63rd, while George Roberts ($6.1 billion) and Henry Kravis ($6 billion) come in at 108th and 112th” respectively. David Rubenstein, Carlyle co-founder, is in 275th place with an estimated wealth of $3.1 billion.
Longo quotes Professor Ludovic Phalippou of Oxford University who warns of the creation of even more billionaires on the way from this seemingly innocuous deregulation:
“This wealth transfer from several hundred million pension scheme members to a few thousand people working in private equity might be one of the largest in the history of modern finance,”
Private equity funds were created so wealthy people could pool their money for better investment clout. Mitt Romney’s former Bain Capital is one of the best-known.
These private equity funds’ vaunted returns on investment for average investors are a hoax. Numerous studies have proved that they cannot beat the return on index funds. Equity funds tout their ability to pick killer investments that produce high returns to investors. Sometimes they brag about 20% or more per year. Indeed if the calculation is made on a couple of their good years, the data may support such claims. However that intrepid investor Warren Buffett exposed their lie. He challenged any of these fund managers to beat the returns of an index fund over 10 years. Only one dared to take up the challenge and lost.
Buffett reported on the results of his bet in his 2007 annual letter to shareholders beginning on page 12. In his words: "When trillions of dollars are managed by Wall Streeters charging high fees, it will usually be the managers who reap outsized profits, not the clients. Both large and small investors should stick with low-cost index funds.” [His emphasis]
The situation is not new. There’s an old story called the stockbroker customer yacht story. Its use of ‘customer’ not ‘client’ shows for how long this deception has been true: A stockbroker took a potential customer to the broker’s yacht club. He proudly showed his mark all of his partners’ yachts. The insightful customer asked,” But where are your customers’ yachts?”
Pears confirmed the ethic, “In my entire 35 years management never asked me how my clients were doing. Not once! But every day I got a report on how much I made for the firm.”
In the following 13 years, other studies have confirmed Buffett’s bet. The investment fund, Morning Star, reported the same finding. And coincidentally, two months before Trump’s administration made equity funds available to money managers at pension funds, Phalippou had released an academic study proving, again, Buffet was right. The professor’s title says it better than I ever could: An Inconvenient Fact: Private Equity Returns & The Billionaire Factory
Index Funds: A Strategy Aesop Would Approve
There is no stock picking in an index fund. The ‘index’ refers to any of the stock market indexes such as Standard & Poor’s. If you try to choose the best individual stocks, you’ll probably have some winners and some losers. But if you look at the stock market in general, it usually goes up over time. If you could take a sample of all of the stocks on the index, the winners and losers would cancel out, but you would end up with a net gain. Buy and hold. It’s a tortoise rather than a hare strategy.
You would need a fair sum to buy an adequate sample. I doubt many readers of this article have a spare $50 million or so to properly execute the plan. However, an index fund is a type of mutual fund. When you buy into one, your money is pooled with other members so there’s enough money to buy an adequate sample of stocks on the index. There’s no stock picking; it’s completely passive. Much lower commissions, much higher net returns for you.
Active fund managers charge a 2% management fee, 20% of any gain and trailer fees—extra charges when you cash in at retirement. Index funds have a very low fee and that’s another reason they are more profitable for clients.
Pears agrees that the active fund fees are excessive. He says, “I rationalized my fees on keeping my clients from making stupid mistakes, not from any brilliance or active management of portfolios.”
Fire All Pension Fund Money Managers
Now, that it has been proven well beyond any possibility of doubt that the fees paid to money managers are a complete waste of money, pension funds should fire all their money managers— but they don’t. In his paper quoted above, Phalippou gives one reason: the pension boards are embarrassed to admit they have been conned for so long.
A more urgent reason why worker pension funds should fire their money managers: there is an inherent conflict of interest. The money managers want to make the mostest the fastest for the sake of their commissions. They often invest in corporations that have been taken over by hedge funds. They know that these predators will strip the corporation by paying huge dividends and other tactics that will eventually put the corporation into bankruptcy. The corporate raiders will increase the amount available for dividends by underfunding worker pensions. (Note: they always fund the executive pensions).
The workers then have to make a claim on the state pension funds– which are now in jeopardy. Sears is a recent example where workers’ pensions were sacrificed to dividends. I explain how the hedge funds do this in my article: How Greedy Investors Looted Sears into Bankruptcy
Here’s How It will Hit You
Lawyers, accountants and doctors have a fiduciary duty. It's a simple concept . They can't use their professional expertise to take advantage of a client. The professional must put the client's interests above their own. For example, if an accountant knows that a client does not understand how to read a financial statement and so doesn’t know the true value of their company, the accountant cannot buy the shares of that company below value.
You might expect if someone called themselves a financial advisor, like a stockbroker or a financial planner at a bank, they would have a similar duty— but they don't. One of the reforms of Dodd Frank put such a duty on financial advisors—but note this—only when giving advice about retirement investments.
As one of Trump's first moves, he had Congress pass The Financial Choice Act which eliminated even this narrow fiduciary duty. Financial advisors once again have open season on unsuspecting clients. As these ‘advisors’ have no more obligations to you then a used car salesman, they can sell you products that yield the best commissions for them, not the best results for you.
Some financial advisors do accept a fiduciary duty, but you have to ask them if they do. It’s such a minefield that one investment group put out an ebook on how to find a fiduciary in the financial advice field
One way to check out an advisor, ask them about index funds. If they disparage them, leave!
How It Will Help Trump
The unnecessary management fees, especially the surprise trailer fees, will eat into pension savings so the retirees well have a whole lot less then they could have. But they won’t know that until the distant future; and they probably will never understand how they could’ve had so much more. Even Trump haters will likely never see this upward siphoning of hard-earned income from their retirement savings.
Trump and the Republicans realize the the worse the economic times for the middle and working classes, the more they will blame what they can understand: jobs moving to China and immigrants coming to take their jobs by working for less pay.
Reform Won’t Come Easy
Phalippou shows an application of that famous insight by Sinclair Stevens that it’s hard to make a man see something if his income depends on his not seeing it. “Why are trustees, investment teams, external managers, consultants and others not seeing through this? Maybe because their livelihood depends on them not seeing it.” It would be career suicide for them.
What should pension funds and investors planning for retirement do? Buffet gives some sound advice. Here’s from page 20 of his 2014 annual letter to Berkshire shareholders:
My advice to the trustee couldn't be more simple: Put 10% of the cash in short-term government bonds and 90% in a very low-cost S&P 500 index fund. (I suggest Vanguard's.) I believe the trust's long-term results from this policy will be superior to those attained by most investors — whether pension funds, institutions or individuals — who employ high-fee managers
In spite of the mounting evidence of the uselessness of money managers, pension fund boards are not going to get rid of these money managers. It will take a bottom-up workers revolt. That would take education on these issues— note how that is not happening!
Acknowledgement: Thanks to retired banker and senior OpEd News editor David Pears for his input.
Images from Pexel
Jan D. Weir is a lawyer is a former partner in a large international law firm and has advised multi national corporations, banks and accounting firms. He has taught business law at the University of Toronto, and is the co-author of The Essential Concepts of Canadian Business Law. Follow him for updates on laws that affect inequality on Twitter @JanWeirLaw and at and Medium.com.


dailykos--2020-09-13--Donald Trump, Joseph Stalin, and the Kronstadt Revolt

Steven Calabresi has had his Kronstadt moment .
The ultra-conservative law professor and co-founder of The Federalist Society ( the wonderful group that has given us , among other things , Justice Brett Kavanaugh ) , writes in the July 31 that Donald Trump ’ s sending a tweet speculating that the November election should be postponed is grounds for impeachment and removal from office .
Not colluding with foreign powers that have historically been considered enemies of the United States to win election and reelection ; not ending immigration of people of color ; not placing children in cages @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the rich ; not engaging in a level of self-dealing and use of the Presidency for personal enrichment unseen in American history ; not the attendant violations of the Constitution ’ s emoluments ’ clause ; not using tear gas and military planes to displace peaceful protesters for a 30-second photo shoot ; not sending in secret police in unmarked cars and without identification into American cities to abduct and detain protesters without legal authorization .
No .
Just the President ’ s sending of a tweet ( which , if you haven @ @ @ @ @ @ @ past four years , is something President Trump does ) .
Oh well .
Take ‘ em where you can get ‘ em , I guess .
But one thing that has been remarkable to watch for the last four years , as Donald Trump clawed his way to the top of the Republican Party and into the White House , is just what it takes for Republicans to have their own Kronstadt Moments , and of course observe those who have not .
The idea of the Kronstadt moment comes from a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fischer , one of the six authors whose works appear in The God That Failed , a collection of essays by former communists .
Fischer took the phrase from the great anarchist Alexander Berkman , who had been deported to Russia for his anti-draft agitation during the First World War .
Although he had initially been supportive of Lenin and the Bolsheviks , Berkman publicly broke with the communists over the “ Kronstadt blood bath ” , that is the violent suppression of a worker ’ s and sailors revolt against the harsh @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regime .
As Fischer explains , it is the public break that is essential to a Kronstadt moment .
Prior to that , one may “ waiver emotionally or doubt intellectually or even reject the cause altogether.
” But only when one publicly breaks with the system one had previously supported , can a Kronstadt moment be said to have arrived .
Joseph Stalin , of course , gave a good western communist many opportunities for a Kronstadt moment .
The purge trials , the imprisonment or murder of numerous political prisoners ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before their arrest among the lights of the party ) , and that most public of betrayals , the Nazi-Soviet non-aggression pact ( the cause of Fischer ’ s own Kronstadt moment ) .
Yet many western communists never had their own Kronstadt moment .
And many who did publicly break with the movement did so not out of conviction but out of fear during the madness of what we now call the McCarthy period .
It is easy , from our post-Soviet perch , to look down on those whose Kronstadt moment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time we would consider too late .
But let us look back on the past four years , and the numerous opportunities that Donald Trump has given the Calabresis of the world .
He began his campaign with an attack on an entire ethnic class , followed by an attack on a former Republican standard bearer and war hero , encouraged the single greatest geo-political enemy of the United States to assist him in his electoral efforts , and declared a moral equivalency between Barak Obama ’ s American and Putin ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leaders were not born in the United States ) .
Oh , he also refused to condemn the former Imperial Wizard of the Klu Klux Klan and said that an American judge of Mexican heritage could not possibly adjudicate a case against Trump University because Donald was going to build a wall .
The then Republican Speaker of the House , described that last statement as quintessentially racist .
Not that that would stop Speaker Ryan from supporting Donald Trump ’ s presidential campaign as racism , at least in the view of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a Kronstadt moment .
All of this before he was even elected .
Since that election , now President Trump has given Republicans numerous opportunities for a Kronstadt moment .
Besides those already mentioned , there were his continued attacks , even after death , on John McCain , which was not enough to give Senator Lindsey Graham , supposedly John McCain ’ s best friend in the Senate , grounds for a Kronstadt .
There were the revelations of his using his media connections to suppress stories which might have hurt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ themselves , which were not enough to give any of his prominent evangelical supporters a Kronstadt .
There was his finding that there were “ good people ” among those who marched shouting “ Jews will not replace us ” , which was insufficient to lead to Gary Cohn ’ s Kronstadt moment .
There was his encouraging the President of China , another national enemy of the United States , to use its economic power to help him win reelection and to build concentration camps for Uyghurs , neither of which would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Donald .
Not even failures of leadership and gross incompetence that have given us three Viet Nam ’ s worth of American casualties in under six months have led to prominent Kronstadts .
Not even Donald Trump ’ s reaction to the Black Lives Matter movement and the burgeoning recognition by a majority of White Americans of just how unlevel the playing field is - i.e .
to double-down on white identify politics , and the support of the Confederate battle flag and Confederate monuments - seems to matter .
Not that Kronstadts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it was a tweet about postponing an election .
For Gary Cohn it was the imposition of tariffs .
For John Bolton it was the realization that Donald Trump would not impose regime change in Tehran , at least not through force of arms .
Like I said , take ‘ em where you can get ‘ em .
But it is a striking sign of our times that the President of the United States can , when asked about his relationship with a woman who has been arrested for helping to mastermind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thing , not the ravings of conspiracy theorists who are searching for a basement prison in a building that doesn ’ t have a basement - that he could wish her well without causing a single prominent Kronstadt moment .
Perhaps most notably , is there a single elected Republic official who has not announced his or her retirement from public life who has had a Kronstadt moment ?
OK , maybe Mitt Romney , at least sort of , though whatever his beliefs about Trump ’ s fitness for office , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anything to precipitate his departure next January 20 .
But Senator Romney comes from Utah , a state whose conservative Republican voters are also members of a church that seems to take its ethics seriously .
In any event , Romney doesn ’ t need to face the voters for four more years , and doesn ’ t need to raise money for , well , ever .
But , can you name another ?
Well , that ’ s not entirely fair .
After the Access Hollywood tape came out with Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , at least one elected Republican , Representative Jason Chaffetz of Utah , announced he was out .
After all , he pointed out , he had a daughter .
Nineteen days later , Representative Chaffetz had what one might call an anti-Kronstadt moment , tweeting out his intention to vote for Donald Trump .
The status of his relationship with the young woman who had been his daughter is not commented upon .
Finally , consider what these pillars of the Republican Party are swearing allegiance to ?
Yes , American Communists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were also , in large part , sincere idealists who saw a political party that alone appeared to be fighting for equal rights for all , regardless of race , religion , or national origin .
A political party that seemed to be dedicated towards providing everyone with food , clothing , and shelter .
A political party that seemed to be interested in the rights of every person .
And if that party dismissed the crimes of Stalin as fake news , well , the evidence of those crimes were not being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and one did not have to engage in the absurd levels of denial and cognitive dissidence that animate today ’ s Republican Party .
Perhaps some percentage of Trump loyalists are animated by a sincere belief that supporting Donald Trump is the price you pay to prevent the “ murder of the unborn ” .
Whatever you may think of that argument , and I don ’ t think much , at least it ’ s sincere .
But it is readily apparent that for the vast majority of elected Republicans , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the fall , all that is keeping them in the thrall of Donald Trump is the sugar high of proximity to power and fear .
Not fear of the gulag , the camps , or a bullet in the back of the neck .
No , they fear a tweet , which , if you haven ’ t been paying attention for the past four years , is something President Trump does .

Donald Trump, Joseph Stalin, and the Kronstadt Revolt
Steven Calabresi has had his Kronstadt moment. The ultra-conservative law professor and co-founder of The Federalist Society (the wonderful group that has given us, among other things, Justice Brett Kavanaugh), writes in the July 31 New York Times that Donald Trump’s sending a tweet speculating that the November election should be postponed is grounds for impeachment and removal from office. Not colluding with foreign powers that have historically been considered enemies of the United States to win election and reelection; not ending immigration of people of color; not placing children in cages; not enacting massive tax cuts for the rich; not engaging in a level of self-dealing and use of the Presidency for personal enrichment unseen in American history; not the attendant violations of the Constitution’s emoluments’ clause; not using tear gas and military planes to displace peaceful protesters for a 30-second photo shoot; not sending in secret police in unmarked cars and without identification into American cities to abduct and detain protesters without legal authorization. No. Just the President’s sending of a tweet (which, if you haven’t been paying attention for the past four years, is something President Trump does). Oh well. Take ‘em where you can get ‘em, I guess. But one thing that has been remarkable to watch for the last four years, as Donald Trump clawed his way to the top of the Republican Party and into the White House, is just what it takes for Republicans to have their own Kronstadt Moments, and of course observe those who have not.
The idea of the Kronstadt moment comes from a piece by the anti-communist cold warrior Louis Fischer, one of the six authors whose works appear in The God That Failed, a collection of essays by former communists. Fischer took the phrase from the great anarchist Alexander Berkman, who had been deported to Russia for his anti-draft agitation during the First World War. Although he had initially been supportive of Lenin and the Bolsheviks, Berkman publicly broke with the communists over the “Kronstadt blood bath”, that is the violent suppression of a worker’s and sailors revolt against the harsh economic programs imposed by the early communist regime. As Fischer explains, it is the public break that is essential to a Kronstadt moment. Prior to that, one may “waiver emotionally or doubt intellectually or even reject the cause altogether.” But only when one publicly breaks with the system one had previously supported, can a Kronstadt moment be said to have arrived.
Joseph Stalin, of course, gave a good western communist many opportunities for a Kronstadt moment. The purge trials, the imprisonment or murder of numerous political prisoners (many of whom had been until moments before their arrest among the lights of the party), and that most public of betrayals, the Nazi-Soviet non-aggression pact (the cause of Fischer’s own Kronstadt moment). Yet many western communists never had their own Kronstadt moment. And many who did publicly break with the movement did so not out of conviction but out of fear during the madness of what we now call the McCarthy period.
It is easy, from our post-Soviet perch, to look down on those whose Kronstadt moment never came, or came at a time we would consider too late. But let us look back on the past four years, and the numerous opportunities that Donald Trump has given the Calabresis of the world. He began his campaign with an attack on an entire ethnic class, followed by an attack on a former Republican standard bearer and war hero, encouraged the single greatest geo-political enemy of the United States to assist him in his electoral efforts, and declared a moral equivalency between Barak Obama’s American and Putin’s Russia (perhaps because he believes both leaders were not born in the United States). Oh, he also refused to condemn the former Imperial Wizard of the Klu Klux Klan and said that an American judge of Mexican heritage could not possibly adjudicate a case against Trump University because Donald was going to build a wall. The then Republican Speaker of the House, described that last statement as quintessentially racist. Not that that would stop Speaker Ryan from supporting Donald Trump’s presidential campaign as racism, at least in the view of the former Speaker, is not grounds for a Kronstadt moment. All of this before he was even elected.
Since that election, now President Trump has given Republicans numerous opportunities for a Kronstadt moment. Besides those already mentioned, there were his continued attacks, even after death, on John McCain, which was not enough to give Senator Lindsey Graham, supposedly John McCain’s best friend in the Senate, grounds for a Kronstadt. There were the revelations of his using his media connections to suppress stories which might have hurt his election, and the sordid stories themselves, which were not enough to give any of his prominent evangelical supporters a Kronstadt. There was his finding that there were “good people” among those who marched shouting “Jews will not replace us”, which was insufficient to lead to Gary Cohn’s Kronstadt moment. There was his encouraging the President of China, another national enemy of the United States, to use its economic power to help him win reelection and to build concentration camps for Uyghurs, neither of which would cause John Bolton to break with the Donald. Not even failures of leadership and gross incompetence that have given us three Viet Nam’s worth of American casualties in under six months have led to prominent Kronstadts. Not even Donald Trump’s reaction to the Black Lives Matter movement and the burgeoning recognition by a majority of White Americans of just how unlevel the playing field is - i.e. to double-down on white identify politics, and the support of the Confederate battle flag and Confederate monuments - seems to matter.
Not that Kronstadts don’t come. For Calabresi it was a tweet about postponing an election. For Gary Cohn it was the imposition of tariffs. For John Bolton it was the realization that Donald Trump would not impose regime change in Tehran, at least not through force of arms. Like I said, take ‘em where you can get ‘em. But it is a striking sign of our times that the President of the United States can, when asked about his relationship with a woman who has been arrested for helping to mastermind a child sex ring - the real thing, not the ravings of conspiracy theorists who are searching for a basement prison in a building that doesn’t have a basement - that he could wish her well without causing a single prominent Kronstadt moment.
Perhaps most notably, is there a single elected Republic official who has not announced his or her retirement from public life who has had a Kronstadt moment? OK, maybe Mitt Romney, at least sort of, though whatever his beliefs about Trump’s fitness for office, they don’t extend to actually doing anything to precipitate his departure next January 20. But Senator Romney comes from Utah, a state whose conservative Republican voters are also members of a church that seems to take its ethics seriously. In any event, Romney doesn’t need to face the voters for four more years, and doesn’t need to raise money for, well, ever. But, can you name another?
Well, that’s not entirely fair. After the Access Hollywood tape came out with Trump’s boasting of his sexual assaults, at least one elected Republican, Representative Jason Chaffetz of Utah, announced he was out. After all, he pointed out, he had a daughter. Nineteen days later, Representative Chaffetz had what one might call an anti-Kronstadt moment, tweeting out his intention to vote for Donald Trump. The status of his relationship with the young woman who had been his daughter is not commented upon.
Finally, consider what these pillars of the Republican Party are swearing allegiance to? Yes, American Communists may have been naive. But they were also, in large part, sincere idealists who saw a political party that alone appeared to be fighting for equal rights for all, regardless of race, religion, or national origin. A political party that seemed to be dedicated towards providing everyone with food, clothing, and shelter. A political party that seemed to be interested in the rights of every person. And if that party dismissed the crimes of Stalin as fake news, well, the evidence of those crimes were not being paraded before the public every day, and one did not have to engage in the absurd levels of denial and cognitive dissidence that animate today’s Republican Party.
Perhaps some percentage of Trump loyalists are animated by a sincere belief that supporting Donald Trump is the price you pay to prevent the “murder of the unborn”. Whatever you may think of that argument, and I don’t think much, at least it’s sincere. But it is readily apparent that for the vast majority of elected Republicans, and certainly everyone one in Washington facing election in the fall, all that is keeping them in the thrall of Donald Trump is the sugar high of proximity to power and fear. Not fear of the gulag, the camps, or a bullet in the back of the neck. No, they fear a tweet, which, if you haven’t been paying attention for the past four years, is something President Trump does.


dailykos--2020-09-14--In the Thought Bubble

In the Thought Bubble

Men ’ s basketball has been in the Bubble and fittingly ( I guess ) the women are in the Wubble .
Baseball is playing before packed houses of canned noise and football began in earnest yesterday , before empty seats of orange , blue , and green .
Boxing and professional wrestling ( if you consider that a sport ) is beaming in computer-generated screaming fans in the stands .
Last Thursday night was the actual opening day for the National Football League .
The defending World Champion Kansas City Chiefs opened with a victory over the Houston Texans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fan and non-fan was what the players would do to recognize the push for racial equity .
Kneeling upsets fly-over country , protest causes people to stand in front of their homes with guns , and speaking out gets responses like “ shut up and dribble.
” So the players tried something new , they stood , locked arms in unity , and the reaction was a significant number of the Kansas City fans booed this quiet demonstration of player solidarity .
Afterward , they took their seats and proceeded to yell out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because of course… It is hard to hear ‘ get race and politics out of sports ’ when whites have used athletics as the crown jewel of white superiority since Jim Jeffries , at the time the symbol of white physicality .
Black boxer Jack Johnson had won what was called the “ colored ” Heavyweight Championship in 1903 and called out Jeffries , after beating Tommy Burns for “ The ” championship .
Jeffries previously refused to meet Johnson in the ring .
Johnson subsequently beat Jeffries and his prowess , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the era of the Great White Hope to restore the prestige of the white race .
All my life I have wondered how baseball reveres records that excluded a significant portion of the population ’ s participation .
As much as the world has had a love/hate relationship with Tiger Woods , the first black Master ’ s Golf Tournament participant was not until 1975 , Lee Elder .
Basketball is dominated by black athletes yet there was a quota of two black players per team when the NBA integrated in 1950 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ with integration—until you remember basketball was invented in 1891 , and pro leagues existed before the NBA .
The game of golf , by most accounts , was invented in Scotland in the 12th century , yet golfer Charlie Sifford was the first black to play a PGA tournament in 1967 .
While Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig were powering the New York Yankees and smashing records in the 1920s and 30s , Jackie Robinson a four-sport all-American athlete at UCLA and a Second Lieutenant in the Army was awaiting his turn to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Mr. Sifford was threatened with death as was Mr. Robinson , not because they double-bogeyed or struck out but because they struck back .
Not since John Carlos and Tommie Smith raised gloved hands at the 1968 Olympics have black athletes controlled the politics of sports to such a degree .
Blacks in America were told no resistance , be good , and your turn will come .
I thought of something yesterday , maybe because it was Sunday .
People have peacefully knelt on Sundays for heavenly intervention , praying , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Colin Kaepernick knelt and all hell broke loose .

Men’s basketball has been in the Bubble and fittingly (I guess) the women are in the Wubble. Baseball is playing before packed houses of canned noise and football began in earnest yesterday, before empty seats of orange, blue, and green. Boxing and professional wrestling (if you consider that a sport) is beaming in computer-generated screaming fans in the stands. Last Thursday night was the actual opening day for the National Football League. The defending World Champion Kansas City Chiefs opened with a victory over the Houston Texans. Part of the allure to both fan and non-fan was what the players would do to recognize the push for racial equity.
Kneeling upsets fly-over country, protest causes people to stand in front of their homes with guns, and speaking out gets responses like “shut up and dribble.” So the players tried something new, they stood, locked arms in unity, and the reaction was a significant number of the Kansas City fans booed this quiet demonstration of player solidarity. Afterward, they took their seats and proceeded to yell out a mock “Indian war chant” because of course…
the irony missed them completely
It is hard to hear ‘get race and politics out of sports’ when whites have used athletics as the crown jewel of white superiority since Jim Jeffries, at the time the symbol of white physicality. Black boxer Jack Johnson had won what was called the “colored” Heavyweight Championship in 1903 and called out Jeffries, after beating Tommy Burns for “The” championship. Jeffries previously refused to meet Johnson in the ring. Johnson subsequently beat Jeffries and his prowess, in an out of the ring, beckoned the era of the Great White Hope to restore the prestige of the white race. All my life I have wondered how baseball reveres records that excluded a significant portion of the population’s participation. As much as the world has had a love/hate relationship with Tiger Woods, the first black Master’s Golf Tournament participant was not until 1975, Lee Elder. Basketball is dominated by black athletes yet there was a quota of two black players per team when the NBA integrated in 1950. 1950–that sounds like basketball moved ahead quickly with integration—until you remember basketball was invented in 1891, and pro leagues existed before the NBA.
The game of golf, by most accounts, was invented in Scotland in the 12th century, yet golfer Charlie Sifford was the first black to play a PGA tournament in 1967. While Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig were powering the New York Yankees and smashing records in the 1920s and 30s, Jackie Robinson a four-sport all-American athlete at UCLA and a Second Lieutenant in the Army was awaiting his turn to swing his way into history in 1947. Mr. Sifford was threatened with death as was Mr. Robinson, not because they double-bogeyed or struck out but because they struck back.
Not since John Carlos and Tommie Smith raised gloved hands at the 1968 Olympics have black athletes controlled the politics of sports to such a degree. Blacks in America were told no resistance, be good, and your turn will come. I thought of something yesterday, maybe because it was Sunday. People have peacefully knelt on Sundays for heavenly intervention, praying, hoping, and pleading for better times. Colin Kaepernick knelt and all hell broke loose.
Vote in 2020 for Change.


dailykos--2020-09-14--Is the Burning of the West an Election Issue?

Almost everyone in the United States is aware of the wildfires burning in the West .
These devastating conflagrations , although of historic proportions , have had a surprisingly minimum effect on the national political debate .
After all , climate change is clearly a cause of the magnitude and quantity of the firestorms , and much of the land ablaze is managed directly by the Federal Government .
Nevertheless , compared to other issues such as COVID , the political ramifications of the tragedy appear to be mostly ignored .
Anne Applebaum a staff writer at The Atlantic , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at Johns Hopkins University , and the author of Twilight of Democracy : The Seductive Lure of Authoritarianism has written an interesting article in that magazine that addresses this.
( www.theatlantic.com/ ... ) The article focuses on the difference of the political fallout between the so-called Portland riots and the later fires raging in the same state requiring evacuation of as much as 10 % of that state 's population .
She writes : Two months ago , Oregon was on fire—but mostly metaphorically .
Angry protesters filled the streets of Portland .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a few streets in Portland .
On those few streets , armed men in camouflage , sent in by the Trump administration , battled the demonstrators , even sweeping some of them away into unmarked vans .
Federal law-enforcement agents ’ presence escalated the violence rather than calming it .
Some demonstrators even tried to set the federal courthouse on fire .
Across the internet , social-media feeds lit up with—yes—apocalyptic scenes of masked men locked in battle , as if in a video game or a Hollywood movie .
A month later @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the chaos , supporters of Donald Trump arrived brandishing paintball guns and pepper spray .
A self-described antifa supporter shot one of them to death .
Only a few months later Oregon again was on fire and much of the state was truly burning .
Yet the political implications of the culpability and failure of the Trump administration in both managing the forestry resources , leadership during the emergency , and empathy for the victims , Applebaum believes was under scrutinized by the public and the press .
Same state , the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contrast—and a puzzle .
The wildfires , up and down the West Coast , are a real-world catastrophe , on an unprecedented scale , with untold costs .
Those who are living through them have had to make terrible decisions about when to leave their homes and what to take with them… And yet even though the forest fires have already harmed more people and caused more physical damage , the images of the Portland riots are far more likely to dominate the public debate in Oregon and beyond .
Why ?
Because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into the polarized , tribal narratives that will dominate all political conversation from now until November .
She explains her reasons for this : The forest fires are also of lesser political consequence than the riots because the tools that we use for understanding the world effectively shrink them .
A blaze covering hundreds of acres will not seem , to anyone watching it on a tiny iPhone screen , any larger or more significant than a confrontation between a policeman and a protester on a random city block .
The new information @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no way to tell , in the constant stream of incoming information—ads for hairspray , messages from your cousin , reports of genocide in Myanmar—which piece of news is more important than the next .
Nor is there any way to tell whether the act of violence that has been caught on video is a single incident or part of a mass movement , whether the burning house is one of a dozen or one of ten thousand .
She then lays part of the blame for this lack of interest on Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this to be true , which is why he and his campaign have spoken repeatedly about violent protest and , until now , only rarely about fire .
After weeks of silence , Trump belatedly announced plans yesterday to visit California andtweeted in support of first responders , though not in support of victims .
His latest task is to twist the story of the fires into some version of the tribal narrative—good firefighters versus bad Democrats , perhaps—and away from the climate change that he denies .
Above all , he needs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for fellow citizens who have lost their homes simply does not fuel social-media traffic as much as hatred for fellow citizens who are on the other side of the political divide does , and Trump needs that social-media traffic to win .
More precisely , he needs that social-media traffic in order to create a virtual world so powerful , so emotive , and so engaging that it will be more compelling than the real world .
To win reelection , he needs to convince Americans that their country , with more coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defeated the virus .
That an economic crash was an economic success .
That the climate change they can see and feel is not happening .
And , of course , that they should worry more about mythical looters and mythical anarchists than the lethal threat outside their doors .
Note : A few hours ago I spoke with a friend for South Dakota , a farmer , and a long-time Republican voter .
He indicated that this year he and his family will be voting for Joe Biden even though they have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gives for this change in loyalties is that he believes Trump lacks the mental acuity for the job as president .
This confirms the recent Fox News poll indicating that a majority of Americans question Trump ’ s intellectual ability to handle the responsibility of governing our country .

Almost everyone in the United States is aware of the wildfires burning in the West. These devastating conflagrations, although of historic proportions, have had a surprisingly minimum effect on the national political debate. After all, climate change is clearly a cause of the magnitude and quantity of the firestorms, and much of the land ablaze is managed directly by the Federal Government. Nevertheless, compared to other issues such as COVID, the political ramifications of the tragedy appear to be mostly ignored.
Anne Applebaum a staff writer at The Atlantic, a senior fellow of the Agora Institute at Johns Hopkins University, and the author of Twilight of Democracy: The Seductive Lure of Authoritarianism has written an interesting article in that magazine that addresses this.(www.theatlantic.com/...) The article focuses on the difference of the political fallout between the so-called Portland riots and the later fires raging in the same state requiring evacuation of as much as 10% of that state's population. She writes:
Two months ago, Oregon was on fire—but mostly metaphorically. Angry protesters filled the streets of Portland. Or, rather, angry protesters filled a few streets in Portland. On those few streets, armed men in camouflage, sent in by the Trump administration, battled the demonstrators, even sweeping some of them away into unmarked vans. Federal law-enforcement agents’ presence escalated the violence rather than calming it. Some demonstrators even tried to set the federal courthouse on fire. Across the internet, social-media feeds lit up with—yes—apocalyptic scenes of masked men locked in battle, as if in a video game or a Hollywood movie. A month later, real tragedy followed. Attracted by the chaos, supporters of Donald Trump arrived brandishing paintball guns and pepper spray. A self-described antifa supporter shot one of them to death.
Only a few months later Oregon again was on fire and much of the state was truly burning. Yet the political implications of the culpability and failure of the Trump administration in both managing the forestry resources, leadership during the emergency, and empathy for the victims, Applebaum believes was under scrutinized by the public and the press.
Same state, the same year, separate disasters that present a contrast—and a puzzle. The wildfires, up and down the West Coast, are a real-world catastrophe, on an unprecedented scale, with untold costs. Those who are living through them have had to make terrible decisions about when to leave their homes and what to take with them… And yet even though the forest fires have already harmed more people and caused more physical damage, the images of the Portland riots are far more likely to dominate the public debate in Oregon and beyond. Why? Because the forest fires do not fit neatly into the polarized, tribal narratives that will dominate all political conversation from now until November.
She explains her reasons for this:
The forest fires are also of lesser political consequence than the riots because the tools that we use for understanding the world effectively shrink them. A blaze covering hundreds of acres will not seem, to anyone watching it on a tiny iPhone screen, any larger or more significant than a confrontation between a policeman and a protester on a random city block. The new information world has no hierarchies: There is no way to tell, in the constant stream of incoming information—ads for hairspray, messages from your cousin, reports of genocide in Myanmar—which piece of news is more important than the next. Nor is there any way to tell whether the act of violence that has been caught on video is a single incident or part of a mass movement, whether the burning house is one of a dozen or one of ten thousand.
She then lays part of the blame for this lack of interest on Trump himself.
The president himself knows all this to be true, which is why he and his campaign have spoken repeatedly about violent protest and, until now, only rarely about fire. After weeks of silence, Trump belatedly announced plans yesterday to visit California andtweeted in support of first responders, though not in support of victims. His latest task is to twist the story of the fires into some version of the tribal narrative—good firefighters versus bad Democrats, perhaps—and away from the climate change that he denies. Above all, he needs to channel outrage against someone. Compassion for fellow citizens who have lost their homes simply does not fuel social-media traffic as much as hatred for fellow citizens who are on the other side of the political divide does, and Trump needs that social-media traffic to win. More precisely, he needs that social-media traffic in order to create a virtual world so powerful, so emotive, and so engaging that it will be more compelling than the real world. To win reelection, he needs to convince Americans that their country, with more coronavirus deaths than any other, has somehow defeated the virus. That an economic crash was an economic success. That the climate change they can see and feel is not happening. And, of course, that they should worry more about mythical looters and mythical anarchists than the lethal threat outside their doors.
Note: A few hours ago I spoke with a friend for South Dakota, a farmer, and a long-time Republican voter. He indicated that this year he and his family will be voting for Joe Biden even though they have problems with him. The reason he gives for this change in loyalties is that he believes Trump lacks the mental acuity for the job as president. This confirms the recent Fox News poll indicating that a majority of Americans question Trump’s intellectual ability to handle the responsibility of governing our country.


dailykos--2020-09-15--SD GOP AG Involved in Fatal Vehicle vs Pedestrian

Not a whole lot of facts available , just many questions .
On Saturday night around 10:30 , the Attorney general , Jason Ravensberg , of South Dakota reportedly hit a deer .
Even the news reports are unsure of what happened as you can read below .
Yet the same article farther down the page continues , 911 call or not .
What he thought was a deer , turns out to have been a man .
With multiple sources reporting , I wonder what will happen .
www.cbsnews.com/ ... www.cnn.com/ ...
I don ’ t know how someone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Was a call made to 911 ?
Why didn ’ t he stop after the impact ?
Did the damage to his car knock out light ?
Could he have been DUI and that was cause for differing stories ?
The number of questions and circumstances make me suspicious that there isn ’ t more to the story than meets the eye .
Having hit a deer at low speed , I know the damage that can be received .
Having seen a deer hit a car at highway speeds , there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t have stopped .
At highway speeds , the damage would have been extensive enough that driving on would have been unlikely .
Had he stopped , he would have probably realized it wasn ’ t a deer .
The more I consider this story , I believe that is exactly what it is , a story , made as a coverup .

Not a whole lot of facts available, just many questions. On Saturday night around 10:30, the Attorney general, Jason Ravensberg, of South Dakota reportedly hit a deer. Even the news reports are unsure of what happened as you can read below.
Ravnsborg's office has said he immediately called 911 after the accident on a rural stretch of U.S. Highway 14
Yet the same article farther down the page continues,
Ravnsborg told the Hyde County Sheriff's Office that he had hit a deer with his 2011 Ford Taurus. The agency did not say whether he reported the crash in a 911 call.
911 call or not. What he thought was a deer, turns out to have been a man. With multiple sources reporting, I wonder what will happen. www.cbsnews.com/... www.cnn.com/...
I don’t know how someone can mistake a man for a deer. Was a call made to 911? Why didn’t he stop after the impact? Did the damage to his car knock out light? Could he have been DUI and that was cause for differing stories?
The number of questions and circumstances make me suspicious that there isn’t more to the story than meets the eye. Having hit a deer at low speed, I know the damage that can be received. Having seen a deer hit a car at highway speeds, there is no way a car shouldn’t have stopped. At highway speeds, the damage would have been extensive enough that driving on would have been unlikely. Had he stopped, he would have probably realized it wasn’t a deer. The more I consider this story, I believe that is exactly what it is, a story, made as a coverup.


dailykos--2020-09-16--On the Reasons for Belief

On the Reasons for Belief

There are two reasons why a person will believe something .
The first is that there is evidence to support it .
The other is that it makes him feel good .
This second reason is sufficient by itself to produce belief and sustain it , and it takes priority over the first .
While we may be alarmed that forty percent of the population wants Donald Trump to be president for four more years , we are dismayed by the way they believe all the lies that Trump has told them .
But those lies make them feel good @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wish I could say that this unfortunate trait of human nature was restricted to those on the right , to Republicans and conservatives , but it is not .
For example , suppose someone on this website were to state his belief that Donald Trump will win the election , and then proceeded to defend his position with arguments of various sorts .
Is it not likely that many would be calling for his diary to be taken down , for the author to be banned from this website ?
The reason is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be true and wanting it to be true eludes most people .
From the fact that the author said he believed Trump will win the election , they would unhesitatingly infer that he wanted Trump to win the election .
The author ’ s claims to be a lifelong Democrat who intends to vote for Joe Biden , and who thinks four more years of Trump will be a disaster would be to no avail .
Those claims would be dismissed as disingenuous .
When a man says of another man , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it would be regarded as pedantic to point out that the assertion is false , that the man ’ s parents were married when he was born .
The point of that assertion was not to say something true , but to say something insulting .
The statement serves an emotive function , not an informative one .
In fact , most people probably don ’ t even think of the literal meaning of the word “ bastard ” when they use that word to give offense .
And so it is unlikely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that word actually induces belief about someone ’ s mother not being married .
But when members of Qanon say that liberal elites are all a bunch of Satanists that drink the blood of children they have sexually molested , the literal meaning of all that can not be detached from the expression of hatred that gave rise to it .
It makes people on the far right feel good to say such things as a way of expressing their hatred for liberals , but to sustain that feeling , they have to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ third essay On the Genealogy of Morals , Nietzsche wrote about the ascetic ideal , the renunciation of pleasure .
As might be expected , much of the essay was about priests , especially those of Christianity .
But toward the end , he said that science was the latest expression of this ideal .
In order to get to the truth by way of the scientific method , one must resist the temptation to believe something for the pleasure it brings .
Much of the anti-intellectualism and anti-science on the right is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sake of truth .
They want to throw off the chains of reason and be free , not merely to believe what they want , but to do what they want .
If nothing causes anything , they can do as they please .
However , the scientific ideal must be distinguished from actual scientists , for scientists are human like everyone else .
It is the scientific method that gets us to the truth , not scientists themselves , whose moral character may be wanting .
As Charles Fort once said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to prevent whatever science has done.
” It has been my experience that one should never bring up the subject of global warming around a geologist , for one is likely to be subjected to a relentless lecture in which one will be overwhelmed with talk of the Little Ice Age , the Maunder minimum , and the ignorance of Al Gore , all accompanied by graphs produced on their smart phones , the point of which is to show that either there is no global warming , or that human beings don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is clear enough .
Most geologists have spent their lives working in the fossil fuel industry .
They don ’ t want to believe that what they have done for a living for decades has helped to damage the environment and may cause millions to die .
That would make them feel bad .
And so it is that all their scientific knowledge is bent to serve the end of arriving at a conclusion they can live with .
Global warming is one thing , where the links between cause and effect can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ causation in the face of a pandemic is a sight to behold .
We see people at Trump rallies wearing their red hats but no masks , crowded together , not despite the disease , but in defiance of it .
They have been liberated from reality , and that makes them feel good .

There are two reasons why a person will believe something. The first is that there is evidence to support it. The other is that it makes him feel good. This second reason is sufficient by itself to produce belief and sustain it, and it takes priority over the first.
While we may be alarmed that forty percent of the population wants Donald Trump to be president for four more years, we are dismayed by the way they believe all the lies that Trump has told them. But those lies make them feel good, and that is enough.
I wish I could say that this unfortunate trait of human nature was restricted to those on the right, to Republicans and conservatives, but it is not. For example, suppose someone on this website were to state his belief that Donald Trump will win the election, and then proceeded to defend his position with arguments of various sorts. Is it not likely that many would be calling for his diary to be taken down, for the author to be banned from this website?
The reason is that the distinction between believing something to be true and wanting it to be true eludes most people. From the fact that the author said he believed Trump will win the election, they would unhesitatingly infer that he wanted Trump to win the election. The author’s claims to be a lifelong Democrat who intends to vote for Joe Biden, and who thinks four more years of Trump will be a disaster would be to no avail. Those claims would be dismissed as disingenuous.
When a man says of another man, “He’s a bastard,” it would be regarded as pedantic to point out that the assertion is false, that the man’s parents were married when he was born. The point of that assertion was not to say something true, but to say something insulting. The statement serves an emotive function, not an informative one. In fact, most people probably don’t even think of the literal meaning of the word “bastard” when they use that word to give offense. And so it is unlikely that the pleasure they take from using that word actually induces belief about someone’s mother not being married.
But when members of Qanon say that liberal elites are all a bunch of Satanists that drink the blood of children they have sexually molested, the literal meaning of all that cannot be detached from the expression of hatred that gave rise to it. It makes people on the far right feel good to say such things as a way of expressing their hatred for liberals, but to sustain that feeling, they have to believe it as well.
In his third essay On the Genealogy of Morals, Nietzsche wrote about the ascetic ideal, the renunciation of pleasure. As might be expected, much of the essay was about priests, especially those of Christianity. But toward the end, he said that science was the latest expression of this ideal. In order to get to the truth by way of the scientific method, one must resist the temptation to believe something for the pleasure it brings.
Much of the anti-intellectualism and anti-science on the right is the refusal to renounce such pleasures for the sake of truth. They want to throw off the chains of reason and be free, not merely to believe what they want, but to do what they want. If nothing causes anything, they can do as they please.
However, the scientific ideal must be distinguished from actual scientists, for scientists are human like everyone else. It is the scientific method that gets us to the truth, not scientists themselves, whose moral character may be wanting. As Charles Fort once said, “Science has done its best to prevent whatever science has done.”
It has been my experience that one should never bring up the subject of global warming around a geologist, for one is likely to be subjected to a relentless lecture in which one will be overwhelmed with talk of the Little Ice Age, the Maunder minimum, and the ignorance of Al Gore, all accompanied by graphs produced on their smart phones, the point of which is to show that either there is no global warming, or that human beings don’t cause it.
The reason is clear enough. Most geologists have spent their lives working in the fossil fuel industry. They don’t want to believe that what they have done for a living for decades has helped to damage the environment and may cause millions to die. That would make them feel bad. And so it is that all their scientific knowledge is bent to serve the end of arriving at a conclusion they can live with.
Global warming is one thing, where the links between cause and effect can be elusive. But the rejection of causation in the face of a pandemic is a sight to behold. We see people at Trump rallies wearing their red hats but no masks, crowded together, not despite the disease, but in defiance of it. They have been liberated from reality, and that makes them feel good.