A ROAD TRIP TO LOOK FORWARD TO

At some point domestic travel will be permitted by governors across the country.  Many of us will be looking for a diversion after months of staying at home.  The more adventurous may be ready for a road trip to the South where the tourists will be fewer due to the hangover fear of a resurgence of Covid-19.  However, gas will remain inexpensive and lodging/restaurants will be offering deals not seen in decades. (We usually employ Groupon Travel or Trivago to land a good deal on brand name motels). 

This journey will outline one of our favorites; a round trip excursion to Asheville, North Carolina; Savannah Georgia; Charleston, South Carolina; and a small Bed and Breakfast in Grassy Creek North Carolina, before returning to Washington. Travelers looking for some beach time or excellent Golf could easily add a stay at Hilton Head Island.

The key to this trip was breaking up long drives into manageable legs with great scenery. An 8 AM start will easily get you to Asheville by 4 PM with plenty of time to enjoy the famous Sky Line Drive.  In recent years Asheville has been transformed into an upscale retirement destination.  This has not diminished the charm of the arts and crafts community and excellent restaurants in downtown Asheville.

The major attraction in Asheville is the Biltmore Estate. Biltmore House, the main residence, is a Chateauesque-style mansion built for George Washington Vanderbilt II between 1889 and 1895 and is the largest privately owned house in the United States, at 178,926 square feet (135,280 square feet of living area).  Still owned by George Vanderbilt’s descendants, it remains one of the most prominent examples of Gilded Age mansions.  While the tour of the main floor is excellent, we especially enjoyed the separate opportunity to explore the upper floors and roof top statuary.

As of this writing, the Biltmore is closed, but attractions in the South appear to be opening up quicker than those in the Northern States.  My guess is that a July/August excursion will be within the Covid-19 safety guidelines.

The next leg of our journey was a pleasant five hours of drive time, out of the mountains of North Carolina into the low country of South Carolina, arriving at Savannah, Georgia.  We stayed in one of the many motels, directly off the interstate.

Savannah is a designed walking town, ideal for leisurely strolls through the numerous squares.  It is full of horse drawn carriages, antebellum architecture and oak trees covered with Spanish moss.  Highlights include a visit to the historic district with its old homes (Owens –Thomas House, Andrew Low House) and museums (Telfair Academy Complex, Modern Art Museum).  There is also the city market, historic churches and cemeteries. 

We were treated to some memorable dining experiences such as an eatery specializing in wild game including buffalo, kangaroo and alligator.  Before leaving, we purchased some outstanding wedding gifts from the numerous specialty shops along the Savannah River.

Moving on from Savannah you need to decide whether to take a short detour to Hilton Head, perhaps to lunch in Harbor Town, before landing in Charleston South Carolina, a mere two hours away.  In recent years Charleston has become the number one travel destination in America and one of the top in the World.  The history, restaurants, nearby beaches and Southern charm all combine to pull in millions of visitors each year.

We have visited Charleston on several occassions and our accommodations have varied depending on the trip.  For a weeklong stay we rented a condo at the beach on the Isle of Palms. For this shorter visit we stayed in one of the numerous motels in North Charleston, directly off the interstate.

If you are a first time visitor, Charleston deserves a 3-4 day stay. Activities  include a walking tour of the historical district; a boat ride on the harbor including a stop at Fort Sumter; and a tour of several historical homes.  One could easily spend a day purchasing mementos and gifts at the historic downtown city market and numerous specialty shops throughout the shopping district.  Daylong excursions outside of Charleston are popular, especially to one or two of the well-preserved historical plantation complexes.

Charleston has a restaurant scene that rivals urban areas ten times its size.  Hopefully the establishments will be able to reopen in all their glory when the guidelines permit.  Everything from traditional southern cooking to French cuisine is represented. Two of our favorites are the internationally famous, locally food sourced, “Husk” and well named “SNOB” (Slightly North of Broad).

Completing the circle back to Washington deserves to be broken up into two segments to cut the long drive in half and to prolong the enjoyment. There are many destinations from which to choose.  Our recommendation is an out of the way bed and breakfast (The River House) on the north fork of the New River near West Jefferson in the northwest corner of North Carolina.  Your travel time passing through over the moon scenery will be five hours.

The establishment features a gourmet chef and many rooms are out buildings behind the main farm house.  On site was a world class porcelain studio and gallery which drained the last dollars from our wallets.  The artist features pieces made from Belgium lace and imported clays unlike any work we had ever seen.  A tour of West Jefferson provided an afternoon of entertainment including a magnificent train display at the courthouse and numerous antique stores.

With a car full of memories and purchases, the final leg of the journey home will be a leisurely six hours.  Let us hope that we will soon be out and about and able to travel.

COVID-19 CREATES A MODERN DAY SOPHIE’S CHOICE

The crisis management of coronavirus (COVID-19) has devolved into a debate between the scientists (more specifically the infectious disease experts and frontline physicians) and the economists (more specifically the conservative think tanks and leaders of corporate America).  The scientists have dedicated their professional careers to developing schemes to mitigate and control public health emergencies like the coronavirus.  The possibility of a total economic collapse was not on their radar. 

Conversely, the economists have spent a lifetime building economic models to maximize prosperity through market-based capitalism.  Shutting down all economic activity, to protect a vulnerable portion of the population, knowing that a deep recession would result, was never a consideration. 

Welcome to the newest incarnation of Sophie’s Choice: save lives or save the economy. As in the novel and Oscar winning movie, both results are desirable and the alternative is fraught with human suffering. Our initial reaction is rightly to save as many citizens as possible. However, no one knows the long-term economic hardships of an extended dislocation that requires paying people not to work.

Such a dilemma did not exist a hundred years ago, at the time of the flu pandemic of 1918. In the early 20^th century, the economists trumped the scientists because epidemiologists were in short supply.  The population was largely rural and agrarian.  In the U.S., about 28% of the population of 105 million became infected, and 500,000 to 675,000 died (0.48 to 0.64 percent of the population). Because the pandemic passed relatively quickly, there was little hysteria or media coverage and the economy suffered minimal damage.

 Some historians believe the most lasting effect of this pandemic was the substantial increase in the number of nurses entering the medical profession. Physician training alone proved inadequate in addressing the needs of large numbers of infected patients.

In hindsight, our modern day Sophie’s Choice could have been largely avoided. I have previously discussed the initial missteps of the Trump administration, which insured a disastrous outcome, and will not repeat them here. At this juncture, finger pointing at government’s failure to act appropriately is not helpful and should be left for the voters in the upcoming election.

The fast moving reality on the ground must now be addressed in a rational manner.  The first meaningful effort by the White House was a call for a lockdown that would last for 2 weeks, with a quick V-shaped economic recovery. Within days, the scientists had data from other countries and more testing from urban areas. They determined that the most positive outcome was a 2-3 month lockdown followed by a much slower U-shaped recovery.  

President Trump initially resisted the science and used his daily press conferences to push for a reopening of the economy on a rolling basis in areas less affected by the virus.  Over time, he has reluctantly come to accept the need for a longer lockdown in order to avoid mass fatalities.

It would be a mistake to not consider our Sophie’s choice between the science view of saving lives and the economist view of saving the economy in political terms.   Democratic states with highly vulnerable urban populations like New York and California rushed to lock down their populations.  Conversely, governors from less populated red states initially took little or no action to isolate their citizens. Liberty University, the private evangelical Christian university in Lynchburg, Virginia, was the only large academic institution to welcome students back from spring break to the horror of local officials.

Traditionally, conservatives worry about massive governmental intervention and its long-term impact on the economy.  The pandemic has been no exception.  Many Republicans believe it is better to suffer some immediate casualties (It is only the flu.) rather than to risk the consequences of economic meltdown. 

On the other side of the political spectrum, those on the left are all in with the scientists.  Why wait to save lives? Moreover, shutting down the economy for an extended period has lead to government intervention in the form of a massive rescue plan and social safety net package.  Progressives know it is difficult to remove benefits that favor workers once they are in place. 

Helping the scientists to win the day over the economists has been the undeniable fact that hospitals and medical staff were unprepared for the onslaught of infected patients who require long ICU treatment on ventilators. Eventually, the President and the economists conceded that a more aggressive lockdown was necessary.  When the hospitals gain the upper hand, the economists will seek to shorten the lockdown and resume economic activity.

The nonpolitical response going forward would be a national effort to optimize public health while minimizing economic harm. This thinking often seems in short supply. To succeed, scientists and economists must get on the same page and be prepared to compromise on their life’s work to help the nation recover.  

There are two critical non-partisan governmental actions that now make sense. 

First, as we make our way through the lockdown period, there must be a national consensus on what economic activities are the most essential to getting the economy back on track.   

Second, we must assume that the virus will return later this year as other pandemics have done in the past.  This will require an “all in” testing, contact tracing and isolation program that can quickly be implemented across the country.

Our early missteps from January must not be repeated.  Following an initial recovery, the only way to avoid a return of Sophie’s choice will be to avoid a recurrence of widespread infection.  This must be the singular goal until a universal vaccine is developed.

THE NEW NORMAL

It is difficult to write about our new virus driven dystopian life as the reality changes by the hour.  The fear guided daily routine now revolves around staying at home with our families, watching our investments bleed away as the paper loses cascade downward and listening to the media talking heads describe our descent into a social and economic apocalypse. 

There is one undeniable fact.  If we cannot quickly solve the underlying health problem caused by the coronavirus, the prospects for solving the economic problem will spiral out of control.

Optimists are in short supply.  The world economy has shut down and entered a recession.  A depression mirroring the 1930s becomes more likely by the day. 

 As coronavirus testing increases, the news on disease spread gets worse. Millions of retail and food service jobs may not exist on the other side of the crisis. Fear of the unknown has many Americans expecting the most dismal of outcomes.  Toilet paper hording and the purchase of firearms reflect the mood of the country. 

Americans do not do well staying at home for extended periods.  I would not be surprised if the number of fatalities caused by domestic violence, alcohol/drug abuse, and suicide fostered by isolation, greatly exceed the number of coronavirus deaths.

In some respects, these new vicissitudes of life do not differ much from our medieval ancestors faced with the plague.  When there is no cure, human nature, not science, prevails. The wealthy decamp to their country homes to escape infection, not unlike the nobility of Florence and London in the 14^th century. The internet is rife with prayer chains and group Hail Marys asking for relief.  The plague doctors of yore and our modern medical staffs place their lives on the line to tend to the sick.  Social interaction comes to a halt, including funerals for the dead.

The role of government in addressing the pandemic will be a much discussed topic. Early indications are that countries that were able to stay ahead of the virus (Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong) implemented massive testing to identify infected individuals and to quarantine these people in dedicated locations.  Others who were exposed to infected individuals were located by contact tracers, systematically tested and quarantined to prevent further spread.

Unfortunately, America found itself reacting to the outbreak rather than taking a proactive approach and listening to the experts. The New York Times reported on 3/19/20 that the White House was warned last year that it was not prepared to manage an infectious disease outbreak. A Health and Human Services simulation, called “Crimson Contagion” contained a draft report dated October 2019. It drove home just how underfunded, underprepared and uncoordinated the federal government would be for a life-or-death battle with a virus for which no treatment existed.

The initial American response to the pandemic was abysmal. Without explanation, many of the most qualified infectious disease experts in the country were terminated from critical positions in the White House, Homeland Security and the Defense Department when the Trump administration took office.  Moreover, the President was snail like and reactionary in accepting the gravity of the growing crisis.

Without massive testing and isolation at the onset of the pandemic, our government was forced to adopt the Italian response and to propose a countrywide “stay at home” solution.  The problem is that this approach does nothing to shut down the early spread of the disease, does not identify potential hot spots, and causes massive economic and social dislocation.

The Wall Street Journal in its 3/20/20 editorial began to question the efficacy of our national path to defeating the virus.  It concludes: “America urgently needs a pandemic strategy that is more economically and socially sustainable than the current national lock-down.” This would no doubt involve moving the country out of the present stay at home mode and back to work in the social distancing mode.  However, the hospitals need to be properly provisioned before this can happen.

The election will be a Trump versus Joe Biden Affair. It will be a one-issue campaign without political rallies or hand shaking.  If the President is able to recover from his gaffes and project any sense of leadership, with the pandemic ending with minimal long-term dislocations, he may win.  Conversely, if we are staying at home come autumn, he will be fortunate to carry one state. 

For those who are willing to look ahead, economic green shoots and positive results will eventually appear. First, the zombie companies surviving on cheap credit will be gone, replaced by well-capitalized enterprises.  Second, for those who had patience and did not sell into the teeth of the financial panic, retirement accounts will be replenished on the other side of a deep but hopefully brief recession.  Third, a valuable lesson has been learned on how not to prepare for a worldwide pandemic and we will be prepared for future outbreaks. Fourth, millennial couples, now forced to stay at home, will not escape their nesting instincts and will begin producing large numbers of coronial children.

Lastly, I am reminded of the excellent epic study, The Great Leveler, written by the historian, Walter Scheidel.  The premise was that over the arc of civilization, catastrophic events have done more to lessen inequality than anything else. While everyone suffers in times of economic collapse, the rich simply have more to lose and the large gap in equality becomes more manageable.  Let us hope that one of the byproducts of this disaster, hastened by actions taken by Congress, is a rebalancing of the economic scales in favor of the less fortunate in our society.

CATASTROPHIC EVENTS REQUIRE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS

Despite the rapid expansion of modern science and the new technologies of the information age, our nation remains subject to events that are unpredictable and catastrophic.  These events can destroy decades of economic, political and social advancement with little warning and devastating results.  They can challenge our democratic principles and send us into domestic tribal warfare as we begin to doubt who we are as a people.

 In recent years, such events have led to the rise of populist nationalism. Many in the American middle class have rightfully felt threatened by these unexpected events and betrayed by the solutions advanced by the political elites.  They have come to believe that retrenchment will offer them protection, limit the damage to their economic welfare and improve their social standing.

Paradoxically, turning outward toward international solutions would offer better solutions to these events for the vast majority of Americans than turning inward with an “America first” prospective.  This commentary will explore my thesis.

First consider the attacks of September 11, 2001.  The early days of the George W. Bush presidency were an optimistic time of unprecedented American global growth and influence both militarily and economically. No nation was in a position to challenge our hegemony.  Liberal democracy was on the rise. Protectionism was being replaced by free trade and transnational integrated systems. Then a group of extremists operating from one of the poorest countries in the world successfully hijacked four planes and everything changed.

According to a 2018 report from Brown University the total cost to the United States from 9/11 was at that time $5.93 trillion. The attack also led to the War on Terror, the largest government spending program in U.S. history. In 2020 we continue to feel the economic and emotional effects of the attack as we attempt to negotiate our way out of America’s longest war in Afghanistan.

The next event to challenge the middle class was the great recession of 2008.  Subprime mortgage loans and lack of financial regulation were directly responsible for this destructive economic disaster.   

According to the Department of Labor, roughly 8.7 million jobs (about 7%) were shed from February 2008 to February 2010, and real GDP contracted by 4.2% between Q4 2007 and Q2 2009, making the Great Recession the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. Unable to obtain financing, major financial institutions either merged or declared bankruptcy.    

The country has rebounded in many ways from the Great Recession, but we are also more unequal, less vibrant, less productive, poorer, and sicker than it would have been had the crisis been less severe. Economists have found its aftermath remains most pronounced on the middle class where jobs were washed away, often by employers using the recession as an opportunity to fire workers and invest in alternatives.

 In recent weeks a third unpredictable event has caused further economic and social pain as we have experienced the worldwide outbreak of the coronavirus.  This epidemiological disaster has shut down large sectors of  the economy, sent us home to shelter in place and placed unprecedented strains on our medical system. For the third time in two decades, the middle class is under pressure from unemployment and loss of retirement savings.

In the face of these three outsized threats: terrorism against the Homeland, economic collapse caused by profit seeking financial institutions and now, a worldwide viral pandemic, it is difficult to blame Americans for supporting more isolation.

Unfortunately, this approach is short sighted and will further cripple the country in the long run. Building a wall at our Southern border will not make our country safer.  Fighting with our Allies over funding against terrorism and withdrawing from international organizations and treaties will not help prevent the next attack.  International cooperation offers the best prospects for homeland security.

On financial matters, it is impossible to ignore the integrated nature of the world economy.  It is a pipe dream to believe that long gone manufacturing and industrial production can be resurrected within our borders to provide domestic employment. Tariffs and trade wars injure middle class consumers and farmers.  Moreover, if Europe or China suffer economic reversals, the American economy will not escape the consequences of financial chaos.

Regarding the coronavirus the first response of our elected leaders to isolate the country from a growing pandemic did not work.  Infectious diseases do not honor national borders and by their very nature demand worldwide cooperation in order to limit their spread. Refusing to accept tests for the virus from the World Health Organization have place our response weeks behind the curve by making it impossible to target break-out areas.

My point in all of this is that the middle class has been harmed by a series of unlucky, “black swan” events. However, the way back is not to be found in attempting to turn America into a self-sufficient economy with closed borders.  When the coronavirus crisis is over, nuclear proliferation, the displacement of millions of people into refugee camps and climate change are but three other issues that require immediate United States involvement on an international scale.

 In the end open-mindedness on world events and leadership in International affairs will best serve the interests of the middle class and all future generations. I am not advocating an over the top globalist prospective that ignores the importance of love of country and the local communities that give our lives meaning. Nevertheless, to face the problems that threaten our way of life, we must also look outward and stay engaged.

In collaborating with other nations to save the world from terrorism, recession and pandemics, we will save America.

WASHINGTON COUNTY SHOULD RECONSIDER HOME RULE

In 1968 a new local government article to the Pennsylvania Constitution guaranteed the right of all Pennsylvania counties and municipalities to adopt home rule charters and exercise home rule powers. The constitutional change was hailed as a watershed in the history of local government in Pennsylvania.  The basic concept of home rule was straightforward. The power to act in municipal affairs was transferred from state law, as set forth by the General Assembly, to a local charter, adopted and amended by local voters.  

 Change is never easy and in fifty years, only six Pennsylvania counties have adopted home rule as their form of government. In 2002 Washington County voters approved a commission to adopt a proposed home rule charter. Unfortunately, the work went for naught when the referendum to approve the draft charter was defeated in a subsequent election. Many believe the effort was doomed to fail because Washington County was not ready for major revisions in government structure.  For a variety of reasons now is the time to revisit home rule in Washington County.

I can hear the doubters as I put pen to paper: “We tried that already and Washington County turned down home rule.” “This is sour grapes after Democrats lost county wide elections in Washington County.” “Give the new Commissioners a chance to govern.” “Home Rule is about raising taxes.”

Washington County was a much different place at the turn of the century when home rule was first considered. We have now evolved from a rural farming district into one of the most unique local areas in the country. An urban bedroom community in the north, with a large industrial park, close to an international airport. A county with a destination entertainment complex at the intersection of two interstate highways, with a casino, race track and discount shopping mall. It is a modern industrial county at the center of the Marcellus Shale fracking industry. Our southern border blends into Appalachia, an area where the dying coal industry and years of neglect is still marked by poverty.  Clearly, the cookie cutter model for county government, mandated by Harrisburg, does not fit Washington County’s changing profile.

My position is not based on the recent changes in party leadership of the commissioners’ or row offices.  Had the Democrats retained control of county government it would still be time to revisit home rule. 

 The argument that home rule is only about officials seeking to raise taxes is not true for Pennsylvania counties that have adopted this form of government. According to a study conducted by Penn State: “the residents of home rule counties enjoy a greater level of government services yet do not pay higher taxes than the residents of non-home rule counties.”  I have no doubt that our fiscally responsible county officials can be trusted with broad based home rule taxing authority to fashion creative solutions for our citizens.

What is to be gained by adopting home rule in Washington County? First, the county row offices could be eliminated and replaced by a non-elected, modern Department of Court Records.  The small patronage-driven offices for civil filings (Prothonotary), criminal filings (Clerk of Courts), real estate filings (Recorder of Deeds) and wills and estates (Register of Wills) could be combined into one court-based administrative operation.

The new Department of Court Records would be organized in accordance with best record keeping practices and would save money by eliminating overlapping expenditures in each of the existing operations.  The small elected row office fiefdoms are anything but efficient.  Appropriate audit controls would eliminate fiascoes like the recent unexplained missing large deposits in the Clerk of Court’s office.

Second, Washington County could replace the elected office of Coroner with an appointed Medical Examiner who would be an experienced pathologist. At a minimum, Medical Examiners have completed an anatomic pathology residency and a forensic pathology fellowship.

Third, a county home rule charter would provide the opportunity to replace the three-commissioner system authorized by state law with a single elected chief executive.  Under this model, adopted by Allegheny County and others, a county-wide counsel would also be elected to work with the executive in conducting county business.  The executive would be a single voice and the counsel would reflect the very different needs and priorities of Washington County’s diverse voters.

The Romans taught us in 60 BC that a three party triumvirate, similar to our commissioners, was no way to run a Republic.  There was little that Caesar, Pompey and Crassus could agree on and much finger pointing when things did not go according to plan.  The experiment degenerated into a dictatorship.

When our forefathers considered how to organize the federal executive branch in the Constitution, Alexander Hamilton carried the day in Federalist No.70 “The Executive Department Further Considered.”  He wrote: “Energy arises from the proceedings of a single person characterized by decision, activity, secrecy and dispatch, while safety arises from the unitary executive’s unconcealed accountability to the people.”  Washington County voters are entitled to vote for a single executive who alone is answerable for his/her actions.

 In addition to the above, home rule would make Washington County less dependent on state government in other respects. We would have greater control in addressing:  a) economic development needs; b) the demands on county government for local services; and c) such control would permit rapid response to address unique problems without waiting for Harrisburg to take action.

The Pennsylvania counties that have adopted home rule have taken local control of their futures.  It is time for Washington County to join them.

IN DEFENSE OF DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISM

The 2020 election promises to be a wild affair, with many Americans becoming more entrenched in their political bunkers than ever before.  The one political ideology that will receive the most abuse is the much-maligned concept of democratic socialism.  I will offer a brief defense.

 For many Americans, it does not matter that the term “socialism” is preceded by the word “democratic.” The mention of socialism conjures up visions of communism, totalitarian leaders and the end of individual liberties. The words of British Conservative writer, Roger Scruton provide a summary of the prevailing view: 

“The future of mankind, for the socialist, is simple: pull down the existing order, and allow the future to emerge. But it will not emerge, as we know. These philosophies of the “new world” are lies and delusions, products of a sentimentality which has veiled the facts of human nature.”

What conservatives and even traditional democrats fail to remember is that “pulling down the existing order and allowing the future to emerge”” was exactly the answer for taming the abuses of the industrial revolution.  Democratic socialism provided the roadmap for how a democratic society would respond to the abject poverty, overcrowding, and ill health in the expanding urban areas. It gave voice to a political culture that would make room for immigrants into the existing community. It expanded voting rights for Western Europe and America, without social unrest.  In the twentieth century communism and fascism succeeded only in those countries where democratic socialism with its liberal reforms was not permitted to flourish.

I would argue that the social challenges of the industrial revolution have returned under a different guise as we enter the information revolution.  It is no longer an adequate response to only provide an economic floor for the unfortunate and disabled in society. The new challenge is to determine what role the nation must undertake in order for all its citizens to pursue healthy, full and decent lives.  This is why progressives who favor democratic socialism are calling for universal health care, low cost higher education, income leveling by taxing the wealthy and policies to face climate change head on.

The greatest misconception concerning democratic socialism is its effects on the political life of democratic institutions. It is a myth, encouraged by conservative social media and outright false propaganda that political elites and societies that have adopted democratic socialism seek to limit individual liberty or other democratic principles.

 Opponents of democratic socialism point to Venezuela, Russia and China as examples of our fate if its policies are adopted in America.  An examination of each case leads to a different conclusion.  In truth,  Venezuela’s democracy collapsed decades ago, not because of  its reliance on democratic socialism but because of its slide into kleptocracy, where the country is governed by a loose confederation of criminal enterprises.

The Russian political elite has no affinity for democratic socialism and has taken control of all media to weaken public confidence in democratic elections and to increase support for its own brand of crony capitalism and authoritarianism. China’s brand of market capitalism has emboldened autocrats around the world to seek economic prosperity without opening the door to civil liberties or democratic political competition.

The best blueprint for democratic socialism lies in Scandinavia where the Nordic model employed by Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Finland has resulted in increased economic productivity, high social equality, social trust in democratic institutions and over the moon levels of personal happiness.

Consider the decaying levels of social trust in America.  In Scandinavia, as pointed out by David Brooks in a recent opinion article (NYT, 2/13/20 This Is How Scandinavia Got Great) the Nordic model reinvents basic education to confront social integration at an early age. The goal is to “create in the mind of the student a sense of a wider circle of belonging-from family to town to nation-and an eagerness to assume shared responsibility for the whole.” This approach places all of society on the same side as contrasted with American tribalism and narrow silo thinking of “me” over “us”.

 I am not suggesting that democratic socialism is the panacea for all of our social ills. Moreover, there are other well-constructed visions on the way forward for our complex democratic republic. But it is wrong to dismiss the principles of democratic socialism out of hand without considering its value in planning for our future.

Lastly, a word about where the real danger lies for liberal democracy. According to the National Endowment for Democracy, global democratization peaked in 2005.  Since then many regimes have turned undemocratic.  Liberal democracies have become illiberal.  Many new democracies have declined into what political scientists call “competitive autocracies”.  This trend has nothing to do with the principles of democratic socialism and everything to do with the election of populist political leaders who seek to divide voters and who encourage their followers to favor the individual in charge over democratic institutions.

A WINTER TRIP TO BROADWAY

A journey to New York City in late January is not for everyone. The biting wind howls through the skyscraper canyons and holiday splendor is no more. But the city holds a secret for those who venture forth into the cold.  Many Broadway performances have a special two for one ticket sale, hotel rates are the lowest of the year and winter restaurant week offers outstanding value for lunch and dinner.  Moreover, the Metropolitan Museum is always featuring new exhibits and the Winter Antique Show is in full swing at the Park Avenue Armory.

The last week in January, we spent four nights at the Paramount Hotel, just off Times Square. Our objective was to pack in as much theater as we could consume.

 First, Hadestown, voted best Broadway show of 2019. This lively musical tells a version of the ancient Greek myth of Orpheus and Eurydice, where Orpheus goes to the underworld to rescue his fiancée Eurydice. Intertwined is the myth of Persephone who became Queen of the Underworld after Hades abducted her from a flowering meadow to become his wife. The pandemonium that ensues is a sad tale and first rate entertainment.

Our second day was dedicated to six hours of Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, presented in two parts at a matinee and evening performance. This best play of 2018 picks up where the books and movies ended.  Harry Potter is an adult and his wayward son turns Hogwarts upside down.  The illusions are first rate and the story leaves one guessing until the end.

The next evening was the play, To Kill a Mockingbird as reinvented by Aaron Sorkin.  This adaptation narrows the story and focuses on the trial proceedings of Tom Robinson, falsely accused of raping a white woman.  The courtroom drama is riveting. While defense lawyer, Atticus Finch, now played by Ed Harris, appears to be the tolerant one in a sea of racism, he has his own issues with white privilege.  In my view, the African American housekeeper stole the show with her witticisms and reminders that black Americans in the Deep South were abused and degraded at every opportunity.

Earlier in the day we traveled by Uber to the Metropolitan Museum of Art to take in the well-publicized special exhibit on “Science and Splendor in the Courts of Europe”.  Between 1550 and 1750, nearly every royal family in Europe assembled vast collections of valuable and entertaining objects. Such lavish public spending and display of precious metals was considered an expression of power.  The objects on display reminded us that our history is often stranger and more awe inspiring than anything manufactured by Broadway.

Our last full day in New York began with a visit to the Winter Antique show on Park Avenue. The Winter Show is the leading art, antiques, and design fair in America, featuring 72 of the world’s top experts in the fine and decorative arts.  Held at the historic Park Avenue Armory, the fair highlights a dynamic mix of works dating from ancient times through the present day and maintains the highest standards of quality in the art market. Each object at the fair is vetted for authenticity, date, and condition by a committee of 150 experts from the United States and Europe.  We saw all the exhibits and bought nothing. (Any purchase would require a second mortgage on our home).

Our final Broadway entertainment was the Disney musical Aladdin.  Highly predictable but memorable for its stunning staging and musical score.  It was amazing to me that this show, which opened in March of 2014, could still pack the house six years later.

Our meals ran the gamut from cafeteria fare, to the ubiquitous pastrami sandwich at the Roxy Deli to fine dining at Becco, owned by Lidia  Bastianich whose operation in the Strip District recently closed.  We also had an outstanding lunch in the Met’s formal dining room and a late night meal at Sardis, the birthplace of the Tony Awards.

We had planned to see the held over Opera Porky and Bess at the Metropolitan Opera, but the ticket prices were over the moon. While stranded in Newark for our delayed flight home, we discovered that Cinemark Theaters were showing the Opera the following week in Robinson Township.  We quickly bought tickets to extend our theater experience a little while longer.