Random Blogging – Sheila Kennedy

Connecting The Dots…

So..how did we get to Never-Never Land?

As the increasingly surreal incoming administration rolls out its roster of incompetent-to-insane nominees, proposes to eliminate constitutional checks and balances and empower man-child Elon Musk to decimate the federal government, it may serve us well to take a step back and identify which elements of the American status quo brought us to this place.

I have posted a number of discrete analyses–some my own, some from others. Those separate observations, however useful or relevant, fail to point us to useful solutions, fail to suggest what we will need to do when the fever subsides.

The various elements that contributed to Trump’s receipt of (under) 50% of the vote (as the votes have been counted, the thinness of his margin has become more obvious) include the interaction of economic unfairness with the information/disinformation environment, and widespread civic ignorance.

Those elements, working together, fed the multiple bigotries still rampant in American society.

There really are no short-term fixes for the widespread lack of basic civic knowledge and engagement. Heather Cox Richardson recently noted a study showing that people who paid “a great deal” of attention to political news voted for Harris +6, while those who paid “none at all” went +19 for Trump. Many of those voters obtained what little news they did get from the right-wing propaganda network I’ve previously referenced.

It’s easy to sneer at people who make no effort to understand and engage with the world they live in, but those of us who are financially comfortable need to recognize how different life is for people struggling to put food on their tables. When every day is consumed by the effort to make an inadequate paycheck stretch, when a flat tire or sudden illness increases financial hardship, accessing the news–let alone trying to confirm its accuracy– becomes a luxury you can ill afford. That’s why the enormous gap between not just the rich but also the secure middle-class and the rest is at the very base of our other problems.

Stable democracies have large middle classes. Ours has continued to shrink.

There is a mountain of research confirming the importance of economic justice to political life (and another mountain confirming that economic justice produces more robust economies). Inadequate and underinclusive social safety nets exacerbate social tensions. Studies tell us that people in impoverished households experience cognitive stresses that affect IQ, and that children from impoverished families in poor neighborhoods lack access to nutrition and good schools.

Economic deprivation accounts for much civic and political disengagement, while America’s current corporatist economic system is deeply implicated in the proliferation of disinformation. The plutocrats who benefit from a rigged economy don’t just deploy lobbyists and buy influence with political donations. The business model of Fox News and its progeny is based upon delivering the propaganda that reinforces the plutocrats’ dominance by assuring their audience that poverty (especially of Black people) is the result of laziness and/or moral deficit and wealth is evidence of brilliance, hard work and God’s approval.

I am a huge proponent of market capitalism, but a working capitalism requires a level playing field, and a level playing field requires adequate regulation. A working market economy also requires an accurate assessment of the nature of the public goods that markets cannot provide. Properly regulated markets are marvelous mechanisms for producing all manner of consumer goods, but (as I have argued repeatedly) health care and education are not consumer goods.

We are about to experience extreme social and governmental upheavals. Much–indeed, most–of what Trump, Vance, Musk et al want to accomplish is immensely unpopular. In the linked Richardson Letter, she notes that one of the largest programs that would be cut by Trump’s new (and illegitimate) “Efficiency Department” proposal would be veterans’ medical care.

The arrogance of his ridiculous cabinet choices and his evident belief that he can ram those choices down the throats of the spineless Republicans in the Senate may prove to be a miscalculation. (Some of them might actually grow a pair, although I’ll be the first to admit that the jury on that is out.)

All of this points to an important task of the resistance. While we are working to delay or stymie the most damaging goals of this administration–the intended concessions to Putin and other autocrats, the decimation of social programs, the assaults on immigrants, education and public health, the further enrichment of the already-rich–we need to forge a working consensus on what should come next. What systemic changes will be necessary to restore and advance the American Idea?

In coming posts, I intend to address that incredibly important question.

Comments

Active Resistance–One Good Idea

I recently received an email from a reader who suggested one very concrete step we individuals can take to resist a threatened action of the Trump administration–in this case, the determination to deport millions of immigrants and the likelihood that those carrying out that mission will be unconcerned with distinguishing between undocumented folks and people here legally.

My correspondent noted that Thom Hartman and Heather Cox Richardson had recently made him aware of some “dark American history” that he had not previously known. (I had been equally unaware of these details.) Apparently, during the deportations of Mexican immigrants that occurred under Herbert Hoover and Dwight Eisenhower, a large percentage of those deported were American citizens who were unable to instantly prove their citizenship, and– once deported– were unable to obtain the documentation of their citizenship that would have allowed them to return.

According to my correspondent, Trump’s announced choice for the head of ICE, Tom Homan, who had been the initiator of the “family separation” policy in Trump’s first term, was asked how he would prevent those atrocities from recurring. His horrifying response was that “we will just deport the entire families.” Problem solved…

In the wake of that response, my correspondent’s proposal made all kinds of sense.

Many of us know, and are friends of potential targets of this deportation campaign. My suggestion is that we start spreading the word with these friends that they actively acquire their proof of citizenship and make multiple copies of such which they entrust to those of us who don’t share names that put us on the deportation list.

Then, if the worst happens and they are deported, they can contact us to get their documents sent to them, or brought to them before they get deported.

I think this is an excellent suggestion. It has the benefit of simplicity–it’s an action that doesn’t require special skills or knowledge, and it has the further merit of being something concrete, an act that can help overcome the feelings of helplessness so many of us have been experiencing.

Those of us who don’t have friends in these communities can help by spreading the word–posting the suggestion to social media platforms and telling our coworkers, friends and families.

This is precisely the sort of suggestion we need–not tears, not undirected angst, not pontification and finger-pointing. We need to identify direct actions–like the one my reader suggested– that individuals can take to resist the coming unAmerican deluge.

As we emerge from the despair and disbelief of the election–as we face the probability that at least some of the clowns, know-nothings, Russian “useful idiots” and Christian Nationalists being proposed for high-level government posts will actually be confirmed–we need to gather. We need to meet in the civic forums we already patronize, and in the many grass-roots organizations that were created in the wake of Trump’s first election. When we gather, we need to focus on concrete steps we can take to blunt the effects of what will inevitably be an immensely ugly time.

A friend who is a Quaker pastor tells me that his congregation met and decided to raise funds for women needing to travel for abortions. Groups of lawyers–including but not limited to those in the ACLU–are planning strategic legal actions. Governors of Blue states are conferring about state-level protections for their citizens, and grassroots groups are meeting to map out actions they can take.

Those dedicated groups that generated some 80 million postcards to voters might turn their efforts toward producing a continuing avalanche of letters to Senators of both parties (but especially Republicans) to send–and reinforce– a message: we’re watching and keeping score, and we’ll be ready when you run for re-election.

Most people who regularly comment on this blog are demonstrably bright and thoughtful. So are a number of the “lurkers” that I know. If any of you have concrete suggestions like the one my reader shared–actions that each of us can take to protect the vulnerable, to educate and inform the public, and above all, to throw sand in the gears of the Kakistocracy…please send those suggestions this way. Demonstrations and petitions and posts to social media may make us feel better, may help with morale, but they aren’t a substitute for active resistance.

Think. And share. And maybe, if enough of us do enough, throw enough sand, thwart enough abject stupidity, we can help America emerge from the coming Dark Age relatively intact.

Comments

The To-Do List

On November 5th, America faced a turning point. The ability of We the People to make a positive choice–to begin what would be a necessary and arduous process of rehabilitating our democratic republic–was constrained by structural elements: obsolete electoral mechanisms, widespread civic illiteracy, economic unfairness, and an information environment littered with massive amounts of propaganda.

All of which fed age-old bigotries and hatreds.

When Trump won, We the People lost the America of our Founders’ aspirations, at least temporarily. That win–narrow as it was (somewhere between one and two percentage points, with approximately a third of eligible voters not bothering to go to the polls)–suggests that the next few years will see a ferocious assault on current norms of governance–on civil servants, on ethics, on science, on the belief that government should serve the public interest rather than further enrich the already-privileged.

Given what we already know about Trump and the disordered and personally-ambitious sycophants surrounding him, we are also likely to see an administration characterized–and, to an extent, stymied–by back-biting and internal struggles for influence. Given Trump’s demonstrable disinclination to do actual work, and his equally obvious lack of even the most basic understanding of how the American government operates, decision-making will be exercised by the quarrelsome and largely unqualified theocrats and neo-fascists with whom he is stocking his administration.

So the next few years will be ugly, and a lot of people will get hurt. The economy Joe Biden rescued, currently the strongest in the world, will certainly suffer. If Trump actually imposes his beloved tariffs, he will tank the excellent economy he is inheriting, which will hurt everyone. If he manages his massive deportation plan, crops will rot in the fields, grocery prices will skyrocket, and small businesses– restaurants, landscapers, builders and others–will be unable to find workers.

The next few years will see setbacks in the fight against climate change. If nutcase RFK, Jr. is given any role in public health, a lot of people will die unnecessarily. The very worst outcomes are likely to be global. (All those people thinking about leaving the country don’t seem to understand that–with Trump in the White House–no place will be safe.) Ukraine will be handed over to Putin, and he and other autocrats will no longer fear NATO.

Most ironic: the pro-Palestinian voters who deserted Harris because they disagreed with the Biden Administration’s Israel policies will discover that they’ve elected Netanyahu’s best friend. Trump has already chosen an ambassador to Israel–Mike Huckabee–who supports Israel annexing the West Bank, resettling Gaza with Israeli citizens, and has said that there “isn’t such a thing” as a Palestinian.

All of which brings us back to THE question: what should the reality-based community be doing while these tragedies (and some farces) play out?

We can certainly signal our disapproval–we can march, boycott companies that supported Trump (although a preliminary google search suggests that much of the billionaire class that donated to him are folks we’ve never heard of, or in the alternative, brands like Tesla that most Americans lack the resources to purchase anyway…), perhaps even mount targeted strikes.

We can stop ignoring the widespread media disinformation network–sending people like Pete Buttigieg to engage on their turf, and creating social media campaigns designed to penetrate the right-wing bubble. Popular entertainers–celebrities, movie and television producers, and other “influencers” should mount campaigns focused on combating propaganda.

And we can–and must–address the “to do” list to which I’ve previously alluded: identifying the structural issues that brought us to this point, the constitutional and policy changes that would ameliorate those problems, and figuring out how to implement those necessary changes when Trumpism has crashed and burned.

Because it will crash and burn. A movement built on denial of reality cannot change that reality. The effects of climate change have become too obvious and widespread to ignore, and failing to fund FEMA is unlikely to be a welcome response. Tariffs are a tax on the American consumer that will engender widespread pain and resentment. The assaults on women’s autonomy and LGBTQ+ rights will continue to generate backlash.

MAGA represents the triumph of a fundamentalist theocratic underground that has been active for decades. During the time it took to eke out a slim victory, however, the culture has been changing. A third of Americans have left organized religion. Marriages between people of different races and religions have proliferated. Workplaces have diversified. Attitudes have changed. Harris may have lost this election, but she was 100% correct when she declared that we are not going back.

Right now, we need a roadmap of how to go forward.

Comments

What We Have Here Is A Failure To Communicate

In so many ways, America has entered into a time that can only be described as Orwellian. For those of you who’ve forgotten the world described in 1984, or who missed Orwell’s essay on Politics and the English Language, allow me to suggest their renewed relevance.

As a recent essay in the Atlantic pointed out, “Newspeak” language is violence by another means, an adjunct of totalitarian strategies.

Clear language, Orwell suggests, is a semantic necessity as well as a moral one. Newspeak, in 1984, destroys with the same ferocious efficiency that tanks and bombs do. It is born of the essay’s most elemental insight: “If thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.”

Orwell’s essay is often referenced by political scientists who emphasize the importance of clarity and shared meaning to the political process. As the Atlantic essay notes, however, American discourse increasingly lacks both.

But the essay, today, can read less as a rousing defense of the English language than as a prescient concession of defeat. “Use clear language” cannot be our guide when clarity itself can be so elusive. Our words have not been honed into oblivion—on the contrary, new ones spring to life with giddy regularity—but they fail, all too often, in the same ways Newspeak does: They limit political possibilities, rather than expand them. They cede to cynicism. They saturate us in uncertainty. The words might mean what they say. They might not. They might describe shared truths; they might manipulate them. Language, the connective tissue of the body politic—that space where the collective “we” matters so much—is losing its ability to fulfill its most basic duty: to communicate. To correlate. To connect us to the world, and to one another.

And semantic problems, as Orwell knew, have a way of turning into real ones. Violence descends; threats take shape; emergencies come; we may try to warn one another—we may scream the warnings—but we have trouble conveying the danger. We have so much to say. In another way, though, we have no words.

In yesterday’s post, I considered the real-world implications of the vast right-wing propaganda apparatus and its coordinated messaging. That messaging employs a language akin to Newspeak, a vocabulary intended to mask, rather than communicate, reality.

Donald Trump is certainly not an intentional purveyor of Newspeak–indeed, calling anything this twisted and unselfaware man does “intentional,” is to give him credit he clearly doesn’t deserve. But like so many tools used by would-be autocrats, he has unconsciously adopted its essence, what the essay calls the “dark art of plausible deniability”– Orwell’s doublespeak—a “jargon of purposeful obscurity.” He says whatever comes to mind, and reserves the right not to mean it.

When he describes “the enemy from within”—or when he muses about police forces fighting back against criminals for “one real rough, nasty day,” or when he announces his intention to spend the first day of a second term acting as “a dictator”—you could read each as a direct threat. You could assume that he’s lying, embellishing, teasing, trolling. You could say that the line, like Trump’s others, should be taken seriously, but not literally. You could try your best, knowing all that is at stake, to parse the grammar of his delusion.

It isn’t only Trump. That right-wing media ecosphere amplifies the practice. The Republican cult adopts it. And the results go far beyond a lack of clarity. Americans not only occupy different realities, we have lost the ability to explain our respective frames of reference to those who do not share them.

We can no longer communicate. And without communication, political negotiation and compromise–even basic human kindness–becomes impossible. (The essay makes the point that clear language is a basic form of kindness that considers the other person.)

Democracy is, at its core, a task of information management. To do its work, people need to be able to trust that the information they’re processing is, in the most fundamental way, accurate. Trump’s illegibility makes everything else less legible, too.

The quoted essay was published before the election of the Newspeak Administration. Had Trump lost, the threat posed by what we politely call “disinformation” would still be troublesome, but what we now face is a threat to our ability to understand political reality.

I don’t think most members of the “chattering classes”– the “mainstream” commentariat busily finding fault with those who still live in the reality-based community–even recognize the enormity of the problem posed by Americans’ increasing immersion in the language of delusion and our corresponding inability to communicate.

Comments

The Biggest Problem We Face

In a recent conversation, my youngest son made an observation that went to the very heart of America’s current political dysfunction: it’s the media–but not in the way that accusation usually assumes. Whatever the considerable deficits of “mainstream” coverage–and there were plenty of them–focusing on the New York Times and Washington Post and their ilk ignores the fact that the vast majority of Trump voters never read them.

As my son pointed out, what almost all of the finger-pointing and attacks on “messaging” miss is that Harris’s messaging was fine (indeed, it was arguably better than Democratic messaging in prior election cycles). That messaging would have made a huge difference–had it reached a majority of voters.

It didn’t.

We live in a time when mainstream media reaches far fewer people than the right wing media ecosystem that has developed in our digital age. That ecosystem goes far beyond Fox and Sinclair–it includes sites like AONN, social media like X/twitter, and all of the rightwing troll farms, bloggers, and podcasters. Their effectiveness rests on a dimly-understood reality: not only do these sources collectively reach more people, unlike mainstream outlets they are all on the same page--they reinforce and repeat the same propaganda, ignore the same “inconvenient” facts, and do so over sustained periods of time. Not only do they distort reality and manufacture issues (immigrants are eating dogs and cats), they encourage their audiences to blame groups against whom they’re already prejudiced.

The center/left has absolutely nothing like this, and would be philosophically allergic to establishing a similar propaganda arm.

There is evidence that Harris’s message would have been persuasive had it been able to penetrate that rightwing echo chamber. When the candidates’ names were removed, and only their policy proposals were polled, Harris’s plans and statements were vastly more popular than Trump’s. But Harris’ messaging never reached a majority of Trump voters.

It is certainly the case that significant numbers of voters simply refused to hear her, thanks to the rampant sexism and racism that characterized much of the voting public, but we cannot dismiss the importance of the fact that a majority of the American voting public never sees mainstream coverage. (People struggling to put food on the table don’t subscribe to the New York Times.) The deciding plurality of voters who delivered the election to Trump received only the Trump cult’s messaging.

If that observation is true–and there’s ample research to confirm its accuracy–Democrats need to stop their carping about what the campaign did or didn’t do right, and address the (pun intended) elephant in the room. How can fact-based information be delivered to people who have opted to get all of their information from a massive, co-ordinated right-wing propaganda ecosystem?

I tend to agree with my son, who argues that the actual messaging mistake wasn’t content or tone. It was dissemination.

Democrats have made a very consequential error in refusing to engage with the propaganda on the propagandists’ turf. Only Pete Buttigeig and Gavin Newsom have been willing to take Democratic perspectives onto that turf–to bring contending facts and messages to the millions of people who get their “facts” from media sources voicing the preferred messages of what Hillary Clinton once–quite accurately– called “the vast right-wing conspiracy.”

Autocrats everywhere understand the power of media, and move to control it. In the United States, a shadowy network of rightwing think tanks, theocratic organizations and plutocrats have been working for decades to roll back the “woke” politics of inclusion and civic equality–to return us to a social order dominated by straight White Christian males. Participants in that network understood that control of information was key to the success of that effort, and the right-wing media ecosystem is the result.

I often remind readers that support for the Constitution and the Rule of Law requires an informed public. When a significant portion of the public is misinformed, when they are fed uncontested propaganda that feeds and plays to their already-potent fears and prejudices, we get outcomes like the one we got on November 5th.

How to penetrate that ecosystem is a conundrum. Making it even more challenging is the vocabulary of the Right. I’ll discuss that further obstacle to political sanity tomorrow.

Comments