Stop Being Surprised

                We need to end the sense of shock some people are experiencing as President Trump enacts his agenda. He was clear about his desires to ban Muslims, dispose of trade deals, wield the power of a “strong leader,” and push forward a classic Republican agenda. As the Republican war against the LGBT community has now landed in a directive that the Trans students are not going to be provided with the ability to use the bathroom associated with their gender. We need to remove our sense of shock. The trope of whether we were taking the President seriously or literally should now be answered. Take him both ways. Nothing was campaign puffery. Nothing was just for the rallies. Nothing will be toned down.

                This thought is furthered by the fact that Stephen Bannon has just noted at CPAC that all of Mr. Trump’s whole platform was in the rally speeches. He was not dialing up or dialing back, he has no filter and no desire to acquire one.

                When President Trump says something, we should expect that he will try to do it at some point. Whether he is talking about torturing detainees, or convincing Robert Patinson to get over Kristen Stewart, he says what he means, literally and seriously.

How to "Get Over It"

Note: This piece was written about a week prior to President Donald Trump's inauguration as president. At the time "The Polaris Revolution" was not live yet. While not timely we believe this piece still has value, and is presented now.

                Donald Trump has told us all to get over it. He doesn’t want to answer questions about whether the Russians have hacked the election. He wants to get on with his presidency. He does not want you to dwell on anything that will ruin his already razor thin victory and deeply murky mandate. Instead he wants us all to just get over it. The thing is, we should, we need to.

                The way we “get over it” is we must begin to understand that we are at the opening of a new administration that is bringing to us a world view that is vastly different than that of the typical American. That this world view could threaten our democratic values and getting ourselves stuck on the injustices that have brought us to this moment will only weaken us. This world view, Trump’s world view, is one that must be prepared for so we can catch its abuses.

                To be clear, Donald Trump may not actual realize that he has a coherent “world view,” as best as anyone can tell his twitter account is a stream of consciousness look in to all of his thoughts. Instead we must glean from those tweets, and his actions that surround them, an underlying theory and methodology. To this I attribute a sense that the president-elect believes that the United States of America is a business that he has been appointed CEO of rather than a government that he has been democratically elected to. He believes that the main actors in his world are corporations. Those will be the entities he is most concerned with interacting with. He views states as secondary actors in the realm of international relations. Often times states are even more impediments than actors.

                His clear views on all relations in his life revolve around an “us” versus “them” mentality. One that his supporters will tell you will serve the American people because he will be fighting for “us.” He also sees the world as a world of deals, by his own statements many times; those deals have winners and losers. He wants to always be the winner, and when he hasn’t won by enough he changes the rules. This can work in the “low-context” world of business, but international relations are oftentimes considered a “high-context” type of interaction. This is borrowing terms of art from international relations focusing on the individual interaction versus seeing each interaction as a part of a series which constitutes the entire relationship. Those are low and high, respectively.

                To make sure that we are winners he will destroy any relationship or norm that the US has participated in, no matter its worthy history. He will focus on business and businesses bottom lines. Again his advocates say that this will be a boon for the country, until one realizes that focusing on bottom lines is the leading cause of worker mistreatment. His selection for Secretary of State suggests that the focus will be on business, and making deals that benefit those business interests.

                A major side effect of this world view may be that he will view conflict through the lens of business. Economic activity tends to pick up around the time of war. When a leader decides not to take in to account the significant implications for the real human impact of war, they are much more ready to jump in to conflict. The added benefit to the economic view is that all things destroyed during war must be rebuilt, a principle that will excite the business man, but should give pause to the public servant. We may only have the former, not the latter deciding.

An Unusual Gift to Black History Month

            This week Donald Trump made news for referring to Fredrick Douglass in the present tense. Sean Spicer, the president’s press secretary, made less news by similarly not seeming to know that Douglass had died or even what he was talking about. The Democrat and Chronicle the one remaining newspaper in the city of Rochester, where Douglass published The North Star from 1847-51, went to Mount Hope Cemetery to get a comment.

            Side stepping the laughter and the mockery, President Trump has proven a useful object lesson to the cause of how we teach history when it is not about DWM (Dead White Men). Those that are not taught about Eli Whitney and the cotton Gin, Douglass is the first non DWM that is mentioned in most American History Classes, almost a 100 years after the founding of the republic. If Douglass is not recognized, then students will wait another hundred before they are taught about an individual African-American, Martin Luther King Jr. The first woman is often another newspaper publisher out of Rochester, NY, Susan B. Anthony.

            We don’t give credit to the work that African-Americans did to build this country, we don’t give credit to the work that women did to either. We focus so much attention on white men. Granted we often study those in power, which by rule were those DWM, but we should also study those who wield power, those who can empower all of us. We have benefited in this country and every other from the contributions of people from all walks of life. So while we are all enjoying this gaff, we should be taking a slightly more serious stock that our President is a reflection on our people. He has reflected that we don’t learn enough about all of our citizens, we should find a way to better ourselves from his example.

            So, thank you, Mr. President. I may not get to say that often, so I’ll enjoy it while I can. 

Betsy Devos, and a new perspective on education

                There is a type of staggering long game that is appearing when you view the new Education secretary, Betsy Devos. She has long been a proponent of charter schools. Which on the whole do not measure up to the controlled way public education produces more consistent and legislatively controllable results for the tax payer dollar. Ms. Devos refers to the great notion of choice, but there is a deception in that. There are some things we should have choices about, and some we probably shouldn’t. Deciding whether to rob public schools should not be the choice of parents with children that are able to get selected to go to other schools. It is akin to being on a boat, giving everyone a plugged hole they can decide to pull to let water in. Of course we should complain when one person pulls the plug and then puts their kid in a lifeboat.

                There have been attempts to undermine public education for years. Some have never really liked the concept that the state should regulate what children learn, for religious or political reasons, or often for reasons that lack sense and only visually seem to be about the first two like not understanding evolution. Perhaps because we, the public, tend to want our children taught science, and comprehensive sex education, but I think that doesn’t see the whole picture. Ms. Devos has never attended a public school, neither have any of her children. She wanted them to get the best education available and she made sure to do it outside of a state sponsored educational curriculum. She has advocated for pulling apart that system, and based on her confirmation hearings has taken few strides to understand it.

                What we do know from demographics is that there are a segment of the rich that want to vote republican, and a large swath of the working poor who vote against their interest to do so. If the former wanted to keep the coalition together their best bet is to ensure the latter population grows. Limiting educational opportunities to families already unable to afford private education can go a long way towards achieving that goal.

                The populist movement of Senator Bernie Sanders was obsessed with the hoarding of wealth. We should have been concerned, just as much it would seem, that there is a hoarding of knowledge that could be happening as well. It is one of the methods through which populations are most easily controlled.

                This party has already pushed a post truth world, tried to co-opt the concept of “Fake News” with anything they disagree, and tried to redefine facts so that they would need to meet with the consent of the administration. This is no great leap to believe that they desire a way to protect their children while raising the next generation of slavish voters.

                Or maybe this is some hair-brained conspiracy theory. Time will tell. 

Golden Arches Theory, An Update

                The idea popularized by Thomas Friedman that no two countries that both had a McDonalds would engage in a war. While this theory has been lightly debunked it shed light on how economic ties strengthen diplomacy. The concept of two places realizing they are not so different and don’t belong in conflict because they both love Big Mac’s? It is comforting, particularly to the American pallet.

                There is a dark side to the theory as well. That corporate interests are so strong and have such pull that they will do anything they can to avoid the possible damage to their bottom line that they force otherwise ready nations to avoid war. While that aim is noble, what ignoble aims might they also be capable of?

                The theory needs an update though. The Executive Order from the Trump administration might help light the way. Seven majority Muslim countries are banned for 3 months from immigrating to the US. This may not be war, but an inability to pass between two states is a clear breakdown of diplomatic relations. Could it be that the lack of ties to a Trump Organization property is the new key to international peace?

                In the weeks after his election Mr. Trump showed a very favorable attitude towards Taiwan, and a certain disdain for the One China policy. Could it be because he was a complete neophyte on the international stage? Or was he trying to reward a Taiwan for the positive talks that will likely lead to a new Trump International Hotel?

                Mr. Trump has leveled a great deal of criticism at Europe as well. Typically side stepping the places where he has golf courses or hotels, for example identifying Scotland as a place where the people did the right thing by voting for Brexit(while the referendum passed in the UK, Scotland overwhelmingly voted against).

                So maybe its time to convince countries that don’t want to get bombed by the US, its time to open a Trump property. No word on whether Kim Jong Un is a golfer, but let’s hope for those of us that don’t want to have a nuclear attack he can get in to it.

If America Was Ever Great: A Series, Chapter 2

The 1960’s

                The time when we come of age leaves an important mark on who we become as adults. There is no set calendar age that an individual “comes of age,” but there are general rules. Typically we come of age between puberty, and the selection of our chosen professions. Donald Trump began the 1960’s at the age of 14. The decade covered his high school, his first college, his second college, and wriggling out of the Vietnam War, just prior to the assumption of responsibilities at what would become the Trump Organization.

                The ‘60’s are a much loved period of American history. The economy was good, with the United States a clear leader in post war manufacturing. Americans could leave high school and expect to live a full middle class life while working for one company in a single income household. We were fighting the cold war but had gotten over the worst part of it. You know the part where Joseph McCarthy had people on edge? He passed away in 1957 and the worst part of his scare had subsided three years earlier with his censure. We were freewheeling and free loving nation of producers! The makers were making and there were no takers to do the taking. That’s when we were great!

                The best part was America was in Love with our leaders. Well we seemed to love Kennedy, and LBJ was someone we begrudgingly admit to being a good leader. As a curmudgeon though, Trump likely finds a kindred spirit in the man who succeed JFK.

                There was some racial tension of course. The Civil Rights movement was in full swing, and the KKK had risen to oppose it. South Carolina responded by flying the confederate battle flag in their state capital, a sign that treason looks best if it’s disguised as states’ rights. They are easily explainable as some sort of aberration, a few bad apples, just like we explain them now?

                The best for part for Mike Pence though? No one had heard of Roe v. Wade! That’s right, women were starting to have abortions since they had been outlawed in the previous two centuries and states were starting to let them too. But of course they weren’t being all shove guys face in it talking about their rights. Couples had a right to birth control but not the everyday harlots, they wouldn’t get that until the 70’s.

                We were even stuck in some unwinnable wars, so the landscape looked pretty similar. This could not be when America was Great though. Why? Well first of all the decade was plagued by assassinations. Three major ones in 10 years, far more than any country should have to endure. Not something Mr. Trump would want to return to, nor me for that matter electoral politics is blood sport enough.

                This cannot be when America was great though because we passed the Hart Celler act of 1965 and abolished the quota system for immigration. We were opening our doors to the world and giving them a chance to help make America diverse, inclusive, and thrive. We passed the voting rights act, these days we have a Republican party that is all too happy to try to suppress the votes they think will go against them. We may have had some trouble over the years living up to that goal, but the 60’s were more about giving rights and bringing people to the table than the recent executive action on immigration from Muslim nations.

The Lesson Trump Foreign Policy may teach the World? They don’t need us

               The New York Times had two articles on January 25, 2017 about the targets of Donald Trump’s most regular ire, China and Mexico. Fittingly they appear on the same page of the Washington print edition. It appears China wants to avoid economic uncertainty heading in to the domestic political turbulence associated with the selection of a new Standing Committee. Mexico, on the other hand is willing to take the poison pill on NAFTA and end any assistance they provide to the United States regarding emigration and security.

                Mr. Trump will likely see these as the rumblings before they capitulate and “make great deals” with us. They very well may not be. The untold story of the T.P.P. was that it was extending the US power in Southeast Asia. It was brokered by the US to prevent it being brokered by China. So long as the US was the leader of the trade negotiations, China would not attempt to breach our fragile relationship by trying to bully their way through. It was a piece of nuance that Ms. Clinton never struck back with against Mr. Sanders in their primary. When the poll numbers came in Ms. Clinton followed her populist opponent in the primary, and then tried to explain away her early support on other technical grounds against her populist opponent in the general election. It’s clear though, that Mr. Sanders or Ms. Clinton would have had the good sense and tact to extend the negotiation in an effort to maintain the dynamic that existed. Ms. Clinton, actually, was promising to negotiate it until it was good for American workers; Mr. Sanders is receiving the benefit of the doubt.

                Instead an executive order has come down that has severed any possibility that T.P.P. will ever happen, or that the US will ever be a part of it. So now the region has been left to China, whose growing influence will no doubt be curbed by something else? At least our president may still believe that. Or he may just go to war over the South China Sea.

                Mexico is our partner, except in Mr. Trump’s Rhetoric. He wants us to show them what’s what and build that wall. Well now they may not play ball with us any more, taking preemptive action against modifications to NAFTA as well as suspending any enforcement efforts they have in emigration. For the soccer fans out there “dos a cero.” Mexico would like to remind us that they are one of our biggest markets as much as we are one of theirs. They are ready to take back the initiative in the relationship.

                The question we must now ask ourselves as we turn inwards is, when we look out again will the world have forgotten how much they need us? Germany is trying to keep Europe outward facing, should they succeed against the isolationists they represent power to our east.  China may well go forward with the T.P.P. and lead to our West. Where will we be? It is unlikely that American exceptionalism should be so well proven that the world will wait for us. The last two times American presidents have urged us towards isolationist policies a divide Europe has helped backslide us in to a world war. The last time this happened there was also great strife (aggressive Japanese military action) in Asia.

                To know the past these days seems to be a text book unfolding before you. We can be the authors of our own demise if we so choose. A vacuum is always filled by something, we are the ones deciding to leave our seat open. 

If America Was Ever Great: A Series, Chapter 1

The New Colossus

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

            These words adorn the base of the Statue of Liberty. They were put there in 1903, after the poem had been written to support the construction effort in 1883. The first stanza has not aged nearly as well as the second, which has been given fame through its inclusion, not only in popular culture, but in the ethos that Americans think of themselves. It has been a sanitized version of the “city on a hill.” The religious reference is removed and we become the great example, the beacon of all mankind. Despite our values, we like to squeeze our nationalism in to the place of religious furvor.

            So was 1903 when we were great? We had just won, sort of, the Spanish American War of 1898. Acquiring colonies and proving that we were a power to be reckoned with. It had led to a bolstering of naval strength, a spurring of the economy, and proving that our newspaper industry was strong enough to push us in to war. We were not yet 50 years removed from removing, in explicit terms, our original sin of slavery. Quite the time to be alive, the automobile was just starting to get steam. Actually it was about to get away from steam and towards internal combustion. But the assembly line was still 10 years away. On that assembly line a worker could buy a Model T with four months’ pay. Now we could finance a college education over 30 years and live as debt servicers until we have grandchildren.

             In 1903 Women still did not have the right to vote. Racial tensions were far from gone and the practices on the post-civil war south were still at full blast. Plessy v. Ferguson, the doctrine of separate but equal, was seven years old. Still maybe this was the time that America was great. We were lifting our lamp and inviting the world to come toil with us. The statue and the poem have long been part of our national identity of welcoming immigrants and being the great melting pot.

            We have learned this week that this is not when America was last great. Because today President Trump will sign an executive order, he will begin building a wall to keep out the Mexicans and he will restrict immigration from Muslim majority nations. Of the five humanitarian crises that Americans are ignoring right now, three are happening in Muslim majority countries. I know the line “The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,” sounds like it’s about the Irish, but really we should be including everyone who is suffering. At some point our President will tell us how he has made America great again, until then I’ll keep trying to figure out when it was. 

Where we begin

This is a space to house my writings on politics and news analysis. My objective is to improve my own writing, hold myself accountable to my own opinions to strengthen my critical thinking, and to distribute my thoughts to parties interested and critical.

If you enjoy something I've written please pass it on. If not tell me where I have erred.

Early on I will share some posts which are a bit back dated, I have created a small backlog which I believe is worth sharing. As time goes on, I will keep this updated as often as I am able.