And The Hits Keep Coming..

If there is any consistent theme that runs through the Trump administration’s “governance,” it is antipathy to science and education. RFK, Jr. presides over a truly horrifying assault on medical science;  Trump’s torrent of Executive Orders has hobbled government’s ability to deal with climate change (which MAGA denies)…the list goes on.

And then there’s the Right’s persistent, vicious war on education. Theirs is a movement that is trying–with some terrifying successes–to take America back to the Dark Ages. That effort isn’t new–the now decades-old effort to privatize education, to evade the First Amendment’s Separation of Church and State and destroy public education by sending students and tax dollars to religious schools– has recently been joined by an all-out assault on the nation’s universities.

It isn’t just Trump’s assault on elite institutions like Columbia and Harvard. As a recent report from The New Republic documents, among the other obscenities in Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” are measures that amount to “an extinction-level event” for the nation’s universities. As the article warns, “If you think the last few months have been bad for Harvard, brace yourself—the “big, beautiful bill” is coming, and with it, a new dimension of destruction.”

While it’s mostly gone unremarked upon in the mainstream media, institutions of higher learning across the country are about to be pummeled by the looming reconciliation bill, which may portend an extinction event for higher education as we know it. The bill weaponizes working-class families’ reliance on debt to finance their college dreams with such intensity that not only will it push millions to the financial brink, it will push them out of higher education altogether.

As the report makes clear, the fallout from these provisions will be monumental. The effect will be to deprive the schools that manage to survive of working- and middle-class families. A college education will once again be within reach of  only the wealthy.

As the article notes, millions of people already consider a university education “to be a costly endeavor that is irrelevant to their everyday life.” That reality would suggest that we should remake higher education into a much more accessible endeavor– that legislators should recognize that improving the educational level of a population translates directly into social and fiscal health. But–consistent with the rest of a bill that honest labelling would title “Protecting Plutocracy”–the legislation would do the opposite. “It will cement the stereotype of higher education as an elite institution into an ironclad reality.”

This existential assault on higher education is not inadvertent–not an unanticipated consequence of fiscal legislation. It is entirely consistent with the goals of Project 2025 and the far-Right anti-intellectual MAGA figures who have already decimated much of Florida’s higher education landscape. The article includes a quotation from influential conservative activist Christopher Rufo, confirming the desired results. “Reforming the student loan programs could put the whole university sector into a significant recession” and state of “existential terror.”

And just in case American voters return a sane occupant to the Oval Office, the bill removes the power of a future President to cancel federal student loans.

While details are still being negotiated between the obtuse and vicious GOP members of the House and Senate, if the measure passes in anything like its current form,  eight million student debtors will see their monthly payments spike from $0 to over $400.

Dentists and doctors who choose to work in low-paying community health care centers will no longer be eligible for Public Service Loan Forgiveness programs, dramatically reducing the number of health care providers in communities that are already underserved. The bill even comes after the long-standing, Republican-approved federal student loan repayment plans, which allow borrowers to discharge their debts after a certain number of years of regular payments.

The House version cuts Pell Grants and increases the course load required for part-time students to access aid. People with  jobs or family responsibilities will find it nearly impossible to comply. And House Republicans want colleges and universities to pay back unpaid federal loans extended to “high risk” students–a move designed to penalize institutions that serve low-income students who are more likely to default, turning “the working-class kid studying to become a social worker, artist, or a physician into a liability to her university.”

None of this is accidental.

A recent Heritage Foundation report recommends terminating higher education “subsidies” in order to “increase the married birthrate.” In plain English, it’s an effort to reduce women’s access to higher education–an access that has facilitated women’s growing civic and economic equality. MAGA wants more babies and fewer women in the workforce.

The “Big Beautiful Bill” is a MAGA wet dream.

Comments

The Declaration Of Independence Sounds Awfully Familiar

Given the undeniable fact that the Republicans in Congress continue to ignore their Constitutional duties, it’s probably unproductive to suggest that they take a close look at another of our founding documents, The Declaration of Independence. If they did, however, they might notice that the document describing the behaviors of George III that impelled them to withdraw from the British empire are eerily similar to the behaviors of their MAGA cult leader.

You might think of the Declaration as the original “No Kings” statement, laying out America’s grievances against the actions of  George III that triggered the Revolutionary War. The list of those grievances was extensive, but several seem especially pertinent to the growing resistance to today’s would-be King. 

Consider, for example:

“He has refused his Assent to laws; He has endeavored to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither; He has obstructed the Administration of Justice; He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices; He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people; He has affected to render the Military independent and superior to the Civil power;

“For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world; For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent; for depriving us in many cases of the benefit of Trial by Jury; For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offenses.”

The Declaration isn’t law. It isn’t even a legal framework, as the Constitution is. But it is a statement of governing philosophy–a stirring declaration of what legitimate governance is and isn’t. Most schoolchildren are familiar with one of the opening paragraphs, an eloquent, “self-evident” description of the basic purposes of government:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.”

Governments, the Declaration tells us, derive their “just powers from the consent of the governed.” Thanks to decades of voter suppression and gerrymandering, the operation of the Electoral College, misuse of the filibuster, and population shifts that have made the Senate a massively unrepresentative body,  it is impossible to argue with a straight face that today’s federal government reflects the consent of the governed. 

We are currently being ruled, not governed, by an illegitimate gang of plutocrats and theocrats who are pursuing goals diametrically opposed to those expressed by the nation’s founders. Re-read that last quoted paragraph. Nowhere does it say that “all White Christian men are created equal.” It says that all men- which we now understand to mean all human beings–have “unalienable” rights. Unalienable rights are incapable of being surrendered, transferred, or taken away. They are rights that are inherently and permanently possessed. The Declaration tells us that protecting–securing– those equal rights is the purpose of government, and that when a government “becomes destructive” of that purpose, when it ceases to perform that fundamental task, We the People have the right to alter or abolish it.

It’s past time to alter a government that has drifted far from its original purposes. Look at the list of actions by King George that prompted rebellion–and think about their striking similarity to the policies being pursued by the Trump administration. Refusal to assent to law. Obstruction of immigration. Denial of due process. Insistence on personal loyalty. Misuse of the military. Interference with trade. Imposition of taxes/tariffs. Transporting people “beyond the seas to be tried for pretended offenses”…

It is past time to return this nation to the philosophy of government expressed in the Declaration, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. We have a delusional ignoramus in the White House, a cabinet filled with unqualified clowns and cranks, a Congress filled with cowards, bigots and Christian Nationalists, and a Supreme Court dominated by theocrats.

We got rid of King George and the Hessians. It’s time to get rid of Trump and MAGA.

Comments

Do Protests Work?

In the run-up to Saturday’s “No Kings Day,” there were several comments to this platform and to my Facebook feed to the effect that protests “don’t work.” (I think some of those commenters are folks making excuses for their non-participation, but a couple came from people I think of as activists, people I know to be deeply concerned about where we Americans find ourselves today.) I’ve previously shared my belief that these protests–when peaceful and large-scale–can be enormously consequential mechanisms for change, and in the run-up to the most recent demonstrations, I took a look at the academic literature, to see whether the evidence supported or rebutted my conviction.

As always, it depends.

The scholarship confirmed the effectiveness of protests that are large-scale, sustained and nonviolent. Broad-based, diverse demonstrations have been shown to bring pressure on government–one study documented instances in which sustained protests over three years accomplished desired changes. Others traced historical examples; in the U.S., there was the civil rights movement, in India, Gandhi’s nonviolent movement.  In the Philippines, protests toppled Marcos, and in several Eastern European countries, anti-communist demonstrations contributed to the weakening of the USSR.

Reading the academic literature is one thing. Personal experience is another–and as I read through some of these articles, I couldn’t help comparing today’s political protests with a not-altogether-different type of demonstration–Gay Pride.

Speaking of Pride, in Indianapolis, No Kings Day coincided with the city’s annual Gay Pride parade. This elderly blogger joined with Indivisible of Central Indiana this year, before departing to join the No Kings protest at the Indiana Statehouse. (A busy day for an old lady…)

Pride celebrations began as protest demonstrations. They are now common, but I still remember when they began, and I think there is a real parallel to be drawn between the protests now erupting nationwide and the expressive effects of those early Pride parades. Like today’s protests, they sent a message. Over time, as those celebrations have grown to include many thousands of participants and onlookers, that message has been culturally adopted by a majority of Americans, although there is still a minority frantically trying to reverse that acceptance. (I was happy to see that the Indianapolis event was once again enormous–if there was fall-off in participation from corporations or institutions intimidated by the Trump administration, or by our stae-level Trumpers like Attorney General Todd Rokita, it sure wasn’t evident.)

As JVL wrote in The Bulwark,

There are two ways protest movements break through. The first is when they create violence. The second is when they become stunningly large.

Violence can cut both ways. If protestors are violent, the violence hurts their cause. But when peaceful protests provoke the state into violence, it can help.

Size, by contrast, has no valence: Mass is power. Full-stop.

Size is persuasion. It creates bandwagon effects. It sows doubt in the minds of the opposition. It opens new avenues of resistance.

Massive, sustained nonviolent expressive activities matter politically. As JVL noted, they essentially act as a holding action. “They cannot themselves achieve tangible objectives. But they can slow the authoritarian project’s advance.”

Such events have another, underappreciated positive effect: they give encouragement to the participants, who see evidence that they are most definitely not alone–that many other people share their goals and aspirations (not to mention their anger and/or anguish.) That recognition stiffens spines and encourages additional activism.

The academic research I consulted suggested that large-scale demonstrations increase democratic attitudes–and longer-range, increase voter participation.

Given the current state of insanity in Trump’s America, it’s also worth noting that massive decentralized protests make it harder for our would-be dictator to focus on individual locations to which he can send the National Guard or the Marines.

With that generalized background, what can I say about Saturday’s No Kings Day? First and foremost, turnout nationwide was enormous. Demonstrations involved millions of people in some 200 cities and towns across the country. Despite the fact that it rained in many cities, including mine, thousands of angry Americans ignored the downpours and took their signs and tee-shirt slogans to the streets. During the day, media from cities large and small featured videos of huge and animated crowds.

If they were paying attention, the composition of the enormous crowd in the protest I attended should have frightened  elected Republicans. Although they were far more diverse than the town halls I’ve previously attended, a significant percentage of the participants were middle-aged and older White folks who in other times might have been expected to vote Republican. These angry citizens can’t be dismissed as wild leftists–they were pissed off Americans, many of whom had never previously joined a protest.

It was great!

Comments

Us Against The World

Before the shameful bullying session in the Oval Office, President Zelensky sent a memorandum to Trump, in which he detailed the numerous talks between Russia and Ukraine since 2014– talks that resulted in twenty cease-fire agreements, every one of which Russia violated. 

Sentient Americans–a category that excludes MAGA Republicans–know that Trump has absolutely no understanding of history or diplomacy, not to mention a lack of competence that those in his clown show of an administration clearly share. Consequently, the United States is going down the path of the British Empire, which was once a global power covering around a quarter of Earth’s land surface and ruling over 458 million people before it lost its dominance. Perhaps our own nation’s decline would have occurred in due course in any event, but the would-be autocrats busily demolishing our democracy have certainly accelerated the process.

A newsletter I receive (link unavailable) has reported on the reactions of our (former) allies to the embarrassing spectacle.

After Trump and Vance’s disgraceful Oval Office ambush of President Zelensky, major world players just came out to defend Ukraine and Zelensky:

– POLISH PRIME MINISTER DONALD TUSK: “Dear Zelensky, dear Ukrainian friends, you are not alone.”

– PRESIDENT OF LITHUANIA GITANAS NAUSEA: “Ukraine, you’ll never walk alone.”

– Denmark Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen: “Dear Zelensky, Denmark proudly stands with Ukraine and the Ukrainian people.”

– FRENCH PRESIDENT EMMANUAL MACRON: “There is an aggressor: Russia. There is a people being aggressed: Ukraine. We were all right to help Ukraine and sanction Russia three years ago and to continue doing so. We, that’s the Americans, the Europeans, Canadians, Japanese, and many others… Because they are fighting for their dignity, their independence, for their children, and for the security of Europe.”

– PRESIDENT OF MOLDOVA MAIA SANDU: “The truth is simple. Russia invaded Ukraine. Russia is the aggressor. Ukraine defends its freedom—and ours. We stand with Ukraine.”

– SWEDISH PRIME MINISTER ULF KRISTERSSON: “Sweden stands with Ukraine. You are not only fighting for your freedom but also for all of Europe’s. Slava Ukraini! ”

– INCOMING GERMAN CHANCELLOR FRIEDRICH MER: “Dear Zelenskyy, we stand with Ukraine in good and in testing times. We must never confuse aggressor and victim in this terrible war.

– CROATIA’S PRIME MINISTER ANDREJ PLENKOVIĆ: “Croatia knows from its own experience that only a just peace can last. The Croatian Government stands firm in its belief that Ukraine needs such a peace – a peace that means sovereignty, territorial integrity, and a secure Europe.”

– FINLAND’S PRIME MINISTER PETTERI ORPO: “Finland and the Finnish people stand firmly with Ukraine. We will continue our unwavering support and work towards a just and lasting peace.”

– ESTONIAN PRIME MINISTER KRISTEN MICHAL: “We stand united with Zelenskyy and Ukraine in our fight for freedom. Always. Because it is right, not easy.”

– IRELAND’S DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER SIMON HARRIS: “Ukraine is not to blame for this war brought about by Russia’s illegal invasion. We stand with Ukraine.“

– LATVIA’S PRESIDENT EDGARS RINKEVICS: “Ukraine is a victim of the Russian aggression. It fights the war with the help from many friends and partners. We need to spare no effort for just and lasting peace. Latvia stands with Ukraine”

– PRIME MINISTER OF THE NETHERLANDS DICK SCHOOF: ”The Netherlands supports Ukraine as firmly as ever. Now more than ever. We want a lasting peace and an end to the war of aggression started by Russia. For Ukraine and its people, and for Europe.”

– PRIME MINISTER OF LUXEMBOURG LUC FRIEDSEN: “Luxembourg stands with Ukraine. You are fighting for your freedom and a rules based international order. ”

Trump and MAGA may live in an alternate reality, but Europe doesn’t.

Rational Americans are appalled by Trump and Vance’s fact-free, transactional assault on a country fighting for its democratic sovereignty. (In the wake of that embarrassing display of pro-Putin bullying, Vance took his family to Vermont to ski, where thousands of outraged protesters lined the streets, calling him a traitor and telling him to go ski in Russia.)

Republicans, however, continue to pander to Trump’s cult.

Indiana’s odious governor, Mike Braun, issued a statement characteristically at odds with reality, saying: “President Trump and Vice President Vance are showing the world what strong, accountable, America First leadership looks like.” Senators like Lindsay Graham are scrambling to adjust their beliefs to Trump’s fantasy world. (Graham’s old friend John McCain is undoubtedly spinning in his grave at Graham’s policy U-Turns.)

Today’s elected Republicans fall in one of two–and only two– camps: clueless/fanatic White Christian Nationalists and spineless sycophants.

When the megalomaniacs said they were going to “move fast and break things,” too few voters understood that what they were breaking was America.

______________

If you want to understand the disastrous budget Republicans are trying to pass–and the process they’ll need to negotiate to do that–I will be doing a Zoom interview of Economics Professor Denvil Duncan from 7:00 to 8:00 on Wednesday night, for the Central Indiana Indivisible chapter. You can register here.

Comments

The Real Problem

Bingo!

That was my reaction when I read the title of this opinion essay in the Washington Post: “Can we find common ground without a shared reality?” The author, Kate Cohen, identified the fallacy at the heart of multiple liberal admonitions to “listen to” and “try to understand” the grievances motivating MAGA Trump supporters. She began by reporting on one such well-meaning example, in a recent book, Kurt Gray’s “Outraged: Why We Fight About Morality and Politics and How to Find Common Ground.”

According to Gray,

Liberals and conservatives arrive at different moral conclusions because we weigh harms differently based on whom we believe to be vulnerable. Take the issue of abortion: I am more concerned for the pregnant person; a pro-lifer is more concerned for the fetus. But we both want to prevent harm.
 
Gray calls harm “the master key of morality”; it unlocks our understanding of moral judgments. “When someone has an opinion we find immoral, we can ask ourselves, ‘What harm do they see?’”

Cohen says she can try to understand that her neighbor isn’t purposely voting to harm her gay son and teenage daughter, but rather to prevent harms that the neighbor believes are posed by acceptance of LGBTQ+ folks and a woman’s right to make her own reproductive decisions. But then she asks the “bingo” question: “what if the harm she sees … isn’t real?”

Thus Gray points out that antigay crusader Anita Bryant “saw gay rights as a threat to her children” — he’s not saying she was right, just that she was acting from sincere concern. His research similarly refrains from privileging what I would call “fact.” One study he designed flip-flopped gun control statistics to see if people were worse at math when they didn’t like the answer; another, measuring how online outrage is built, included tweets about “the dangers of critical race theory.” It’s the perception of harm that matters…

I think we’re in this mess because one side’s perception of harm is increasingly disconnected from reality. I’d happily live in a world where my neighbor and I could discuss which harms concerned us more: the suffering of refugee children or the burdens on border-town citizens. The livelihood of coal miners or the warming of the globe. But in the world we live in — the world that reelected President Donald Trump — there’s a strong chance she believes that immigrants are eating pets and that climate change is a hoax.

And that –the refusal of millions of people to accept facts, evidence and demonstrable reality and opting to reside in a fantasy universe–is the crux of our current problem. 

On this blog, I have repeatedly argued that the information environment we inhabit enables a large percentage of the population to indulge in confirmation bias. Granted, there have always been sources of disinformation, but never before in history has it been so easy to access “evidence” that confirms one’s desired beliefs and prejudices.

Has your life failed to unfold as you hoped? Are you convinced that some “other” is to blame for your disappointments? There are literally hundreds–probably thousands–of websites that explain that the Black person or woman got the promotion because of “wokism,” and why the elevation of that non-Christian is evidence that “DEI hires” have replaced merit.

Is your livelihood or comfort level connected to the prospects of fossil fuels? There are plenty of “sources” that will confirm the perfidy of scientists who are “in on” the “global warming hoax.” 

Are you suspicious of all science–especially when it is based on empirical data that conflicts with your “biblical” understandings? “Bible-believing” websites will explain why the doctors trying to explain why abortion bans threaten women’s health and lives are just anti-religious liberals intent on killing babies and allowing women to ignore their God-ordained submissive roles.

Are you uncomfortable around gay folks? Lots of “religious” sites will confirm that they are “ungodly groomers,” (and that all those mainstream media reports implicating youth pastors and other pious church folks are exaggerated).

I could go on. And on.

We live in a world where technology–and yes, free speech–facilitates the construction of fantasy realities. And as Cohen accurately notes, finding “common ground” with folks who live in alternate universes simply isn’t possible.

Thanks to well-meaning liberals trying to reach that “common ground,” we are now inhabiting a country that–as Paul Krugman recently wrote– is being ruled by a mad king living in an alternate reality and a erratic, ketamine-fueled oligarch — and it’s not clear which is the other’s sidekick.

Finding “common ground” with madmen is suicidal.

Comments