THE MIDDLE FINGER TRUMP SUPPORTERS

It is common for presidential primaries to be about change.  Political actors with a vision for America will often spend time and money in support of marginal primary candidates who support their fringe views.  While the candidate supported may not win the nomination, the views of the non winner have often influenced the party platform and ideological positions going forward.

What is different about the 2016 republican primaries is that a personality has “trumped” conservative ideology.  Instead of advocating change within a party framework, legions of supporters have abandoned and ridiculed the republican establishment in favor of this personality, Donald Trump.  There is an intuitive feeling among Trump backers that what traditional political leaders with strong views could not accomplish, a strong leader who appears to think and talk like they feel, will accomplish.  Better to move forward with a powerful leader than to get nothing done with a weak right thinking ideologue.

 The Trump philosophy was summed up nicely when he re- tweeted the well worn quote: “It is better to live one day as a lion than 100 years as a sheep” just days before the Super Tuesday Primaries.  This statement is attributed to fascist Italian dictator Benito Mussolini who got the trains to run on time in Italy by crushing all political opposition.  Like Trump, Mussolini’s political slogan was: “make us great again” in the hope of returning Italy to the glory of the Roman Empire.  Maybe like Trump, Mussolini saw no need for inept coalition building after the electorate gave him an open mandate to create order from perceived chaos.

If Trump sees himself as the flash in the pan lion the rest of us must ask who he sees as the old and wizened sheep.  Getting things done through a blitz of bullying and bravado at the expense of democracy is not an original political doctrine.  It is a path to power most of us thought was buried at the end of the Second World War.

 Another fascist leader famously said:” Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.”  Adolf Hitler captured the imagination of the German electorate as a straight talking bully with the big lie he could “make Germany great again” and went on to destroy the world.  Hitler unified disgruntled Germans by attacking Jews and weak- kneed politicians.  Trump is unifying disgruntled Americas by attacking immigrants, Muslims and weak-kneed politicians.

 Those of you who are raising the middle finger to the republican establishment in support of Donald Trump, in the hope of returning America to the Promised Land, be careful what you wish for.  Your candidate may soon be raising the middle finger to our constitutional republic as he seeks to have his yet to be articulated vision for America trump all others.

BRINKMANSHIP HAS REPLACED COMPROMISE IN ALL OF OUR POLITICAL AFFAIRS

If I were to choose a word to define our political world in this 2016 winter of our discontent, it would be “brinkmanship.”  This term is defined as:  the art or practice of pursuing a dangerous policy to the limits of safety before stopping, typically in politics.  We are surrounded by examples of brinkmanship and they are dangerous indeed.

In Pennsylvania, our democratic governor and republican legislature continue to practice brinkmanship on a scale that not even the most jaded political observers thought possible.  We are entering into a second year in which the passing of a constitutionally mandated state budget seems unachievable.  Political ideologies have replaced political compromise.  As school districts and social service agencies scramble to keep the doors open, irreparable damage is being caused to the Commonwealth.

In the presidential election Donald Trump practices brinkmanship to the limits of acceptable populist politics and behavior on the campaign trail. His insults against Latinos and Muslims are borderline racist and have invoked angry reactions abroad and religious rebukes from the Pope.  His use of profanity and insults against other candidates are uncivil and in bad taste.  None of this conduct will cease until it begins to have a negative effect on his political campaign.

Congress has continued to toy with brinkmanship in 2016 mostly through omission and “kicking the can down the road.” The national debt, Social Security and Medicare reform and funding for road, bridge and electric grid infrastructure simply get ignored.  One has the feeling that only a significant crisis, like the 2008 financial meltdown, will reverse this edge of the cliff mentality and result in positive action.

In the Syrian conflict, the major actors: The United States, Iran, Turkey, Kurdish fighters,  Saudi Arabia, Russia, the Syrian leader, Bashar al-Assad and Syrian rebel groups are all practicing brinkmanship.   Syria has become the worst humanitarian disaster in the history of the Middle East.  The citizens of an entire country are either being massacred by the ongoing violence, starved to death, or forced to become part of the large migration into Europe, where they are not welcome.  While all the actors agree that only a political solution can stop this destruction of a nation, all attempts to broker a cease fire have been feeble at best. Apparently, only when the groups supporting Assad gain the advantage will this policy change.

 

 The ongoing blow-up in the oil and gas markets, now well over a year old, is a classic example of brinkmanship.  In the past the OPEC countries, lead by Saudi Arabia developed a consensus on oil and gas production to cause minimal disruption to the world economy.  In November of 2014, the Saudis went their own way and decided not to cut production no matter how low the price of oil became.  The result has been major economic dislocations in Brazil, Russia, Venezuela, Nigeria and in the United States shale belt. This brinksmanship is designed to cripple the Saudi’s mortal enemy Iran, now back in the oil market, and to bankrupt other producers around the world.  This policy is causing economic and political dislocations in Saudi Arabia as well, so the political danger on the Saudi home front from this brinkmanship is real and growing.

 

Other recent examples of brinkmanship abound, including North Korea firing missiles, knowing that the world would react with sanctions and possible force; Russian involvement in the Ukraine and Isis taking terrorism to a new level, forcing the civilized world to take action to destroy it.  Many scientists would argue that the brinkmanship of world leaders in failing to react vigorously to climate change has placed humanity on the path of no return.

 

With the exception of the Iran nuclear agreement, political compromise, defined as a way of reaching an agreement in which each person or group gives up something that was wanted in order to end an argument or dispute, has not been in vogue in 2016.  This is not an optimistic trend. 

 

Continuing to live on the brink will eventually result in disaster and force political compromise back into play.  The cumulative damage before rationality returns will be enormous in terms of lost human life, broken political institutions and failed international relations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A PROPOSAL FOR THE PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARIES

The country has been discussing the Iowa and New Hampshire presidential primaries since last summer. Now that they are completed, following the months of anticipation, millions of dollars spent by the candidates and all of the national media reporting 24/7 from cold environs in local taverns, what do we know?

We know that the primary season began with two of the whitest states in the union.  Arguably, the only Latinos in town were the migrant workers hiding from the Trump and Cruz supporters who gathered to degrade them.  The few minorities at the polling sites belonged to members of the media and to out of state volunteers.

We know that every four years a conservative republican supported by evangelicals wins the Iowa caucuses and goes on to lose the nomination.  We know that democratic candidates, who worked the small but energetic college campuses in Iowa and called for progressive ideals that will never see the light of day, did well in the caucuses.  We know that when all else failed, singing the praises of ethanol gained some support.

In New Hampshire there is actually a traditional voting process.  But the results can be suspect because under state law any voter can walk into a polling pace and choose a primary ballot for any party. In neither contest, nor in the third and fourth contests, the South Carolina primary and Nevada caucus, is there an urban area of any consequence represented.

 Thus, every four years our presidential primaries are front loaded with  ultra conservative rural republican and ultra progressive college town democratic populations.  Moderates are nowhere to be found.  The candidates are compelled to speak to the fringes of our political system in order to stay in the race. It is not surprising that outlier candidates do better in these early primaries than more mainstream ones.

No one would advocate that we return to the “smoky back room” system of choosing presidential candidates at conventions, guided by party bosses.  But if we are going to have primaries let’s make them enjoyable, representative of the general population and tied to the issues that will dominate the mainstream of political discourse in the general election.

The enjoyable part is easy.  Americans love to live vicariously through their celebrities in warmer climates.  There is nothing like watching a golf tournament from Phoenix, Pebble Beach or Doral on a snowy day to chase away the winter blues.  Or to follow ones favorite baseball team in spring training. If the early February primaries followed the winter PGA schedule to California, Arizona and Florida, the brutal campaign schedule would be more pleasant for candidates and viewers alike. In addition to warm breezes, this approach would have two of our largest and most diverse states voting early in the primary process.

There are a number of ways to make the remaining primaries more representative so that all of the United States feels part of the important business of choosing a president. I would favor what has been called the “Rotating Regional Plan” to take place after the three “sunshine” primaries above.  Under this scheme, the country is divided into four regions. Each region takes its turn voting first every four years.  The four primaries would rotate on a once a month schedule, March through June.

It is clear that the traditional primary schedule has worn out its usefulness and needs to be revamped.  It is simply not reflective of representative government to have these small states play such an outsized role in presidential politics.   Moreover, with my proposal those frozen volunteers from Iowa and New Hampshire can go to a warm climate in February to work on the campaign of their choice.

AUTISM IS NOT THE NEW NORMAL

In today’s multifaceted world of seven billion humans, is there any method to determine what is normal?  Stated another way, given all the complexity in the world, what human activities and conditions make it under the umbrella of diverse but normal human behavior?

Starting with religion, almost all spiritual practices would seem to qualify as normal short of violent voodoo worship and human sacrifice. All races and ethnicities make the cut. Accepted sexual diversity would now include homosexuality and transgender individuals but not pedophilia.  Diverse political philosophies would be included excepting terrorism, ethnic cleansing and unilateral aggression against sovereign nations.

 We do not typically apply the label of normal when discussing disease or disability.  This is appropriate because it is often society’s aim to help sick and disabled individuals live the best life possible. This is accomplished by society recognizing the consequences and uniqueness of a particular disease or disability and dedicating resources to develop medicines, therapies and accommodations for afflicted individuals.

In reading a recent article on autism, I was shocked to learn that not all individuals characterized as autistic want to be labeled as such and prefer to be part of a new normal. (The New Yorker, Seeing the Spectrum 1/25/16)

Apparently, we now have autistic individuals who are “neurodiversity activists”.  These are individuals on the higher end of the autism-asperger spectrum who insist they are neurologically “normal” and who disdain all labels that would make them otherwise.  To the horror of parents struggling with autistic children, these activists proclaim to all who will listen that: “there should be no more talk of pathology and no more programs for treatment and cure”.  Their creed is that: “in the same way that we have learned to celebrate racial, ethnic and sexual diversity, we should now be celebrating neurodiversity.”  Under this theory, autism is just another way of looking at the world.  They are diverse but normal.

I find this approach to autism, or any physical/ mental disease or defect troubling.  Should we expand the normal human condition to include deafness because Beethoven wrote symphonies while deaf?  Perhaps we should make room for cancer, blindness, paraplegia, or severe mental illness because of Van Gogh’s magnificent paintings?   I think not.

Ironically, certain infirmities come with a long practiced therapy where admitting abnormality is part of the cure.  Alcoholics and Addicts are taught to attend meetings and identify with others suffering from the same condition.  This self identification includes standing up and proclaiming your name and that you have the disease. The 12 step program has the central goal of breaking down denial and admitting you are not normal. The therapy has also worked well for eating disorders and gambling problems.

In my view when it comes to disease or disability, recognizing you have a problem that is not normal and that requires special attention is key toward conquering or at least accommodating the impairment.  For those who have overcome the disease or disability, the least they can do is help others who are not as fortunate to find a path forward.

Experience has shown that while some autistic adults can learn to live independently, many cannot.  It is understandable that no one wants to be tagged with a label that makes them different, be it autistic or diabetic.  But lobbying to make autism or any other disease or disability part of the diverse but normal human condition is going too far. It is a self centered response that will drive away public awareness and research dollars.