Authoritarianism - A present danger

Recently, I reread an article published almost a year ago, and noticed something salient to what has happened in America over the past year. The urban/rural divide in America also corresponds to a second divide - that of Libertarians and Authoritarians.

- - - - - -

In the Vox article published last March, they discussed a simple 4 question test that could be used to determine whether a person had authoritarian tendencies:

1. Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have:  independence or respect for elders?
2. Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have: obedience or self-reliance?
3. Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have: to be considerate or to be well-behaved?
4. Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have: curiosity or good manners?

These questions appear to ask about parenting but are in fact designed to reveal how highly the respondent values hierarchy, order, and conformity over other values.

- - - - - -

I do not intend to ignore how a person values hierarchy, order and conformity.  Instead, I pose that without adequate checks and balances, these values can easily be subverted to destroy liberty.

Recently, one member of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir resigned her position in the choir, instead of perform at Trump's inauguration. She considers her church's lesson of always choosing to do what is right, over that of what is convenient, a very important lesson for all to follow.  The appearance of the choir at the inauguration in her eyes is an endorsement of someone who violates all Mormon tenets, save that he does not drink alcohol.  

The history of the Mormon church was one that began with oppression.  They were persecuted in the early days, and chased out of states like New York and Missouri until they reached their promised land in Utah. Although I do not agree with their creed, I respect them as people - as they try to respect others.  Many Mormons remember their history, and are very offended by Trump's campaign when he advocated a Muslim Registry.  They were among the first to see the potential for an authoritarian government going wild.  And though Mormons tend to be more "traditional" in their answers to the 4 questions above, their faith tends to provide a form of check and balance against tyranny - which might be due to the teaching to do what is right, over that which is convenient.

- - - - - -

We now are seeing a president who does only what is convenient, and not what is right. He has partnered with people whose beliefs and prior actions indicate that they will shred the current social safety net, and leave nothing good in their wake. Additionally, he is now starting to destroy the credibility of the independent press, so that he and his cronies can "gaslight" the public. 

In a recent CNN posting, we are asked what side of history we want to be on.  I hope that enough Americans stand up to do the right thing, no matter how inconvenient, so that we pass on a great country to our children and grandchildren.

I'm not sure of what to think

Does adding a second bible add any substance, legitimacy or truth to what Trump swore to on Inauguration Day?  I doubt it.  It only serves to create an image of false piety for a man from whose mouth only comes lies - including the words "And" and "The".

- - - - - -

As I write this entry, less than two weeks have expired since Trump took office, and we're already seeing chaos in the land. Previously approved refugees, legal residents/green card holders, and other vetted people are being denied entry to the USA, because of Trump's latest executive order. How does this make us any safer? How does this make us appear to the rest of the world?  To me, it only gives nations such as Iran a propaganda advantage, as they will not reject previously approved holders of American passports from visiting their country. And to make things worse, the 3 Arabic speaking countries which are exempt from Trump's executive order (Egypt, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia) are those in which Trump has business interests.  Two of these countries (Saudi Arabia and the UAE) are countries that supplied the 19 hijackers that commandeered the planes on 9/11/01, killing almost 3,000 Americans.

An op-ed piece in the Huffington Post is already.talking about the inevitability of impeachment. But is that what a Democrat should be looking for?  Each day that Trump is in office, he tarnishes the GOP brand and helps to mobilize more potential Democratic voters - people who could be very useful in 2018 and 2020. When the Women's March gathered 3 times on the National Mall as many people as Trump's inauguration, one has a potential movement.  But when one takes into account the other 1,500,000 people protesting around the world, it's easy to see that a raw nerve has been touched.  We have to make sure that the reaction gets us the results we want.

- - - - - -

It is no accident that ALL of Trump's appointments have been to the extreme political right. His deal with Pence is likely the same he offered to John Kasich: You run both foreign and domestic affairs, while I make America great again.  Kasich has some ethics, Pence does not. He is a religious wingnut, someone more dangerous to us than Trump - something that I found hard to believe at first.  If we are stuck with a President Pence, he will follow the GOP policy with no compromises allowed. This is different from Trump, as he can easily be manipulated with flattery.  

The Huffington Post piece noted that Trump suffers from Malignant Narcissism.  Otto Kernberg characterizes it by an absence of conscience, a pathological grandiosity and quest for power, and a sadistic joy in cruelty. And everything said about Trump indicates a diagnosis of Malignant Narcissism would be one of the things high on the list of possibilities. Can we afford this in a national leader?

It is possible to manipulate someone like Trump.  It has often been said about him, that if you are the last to give him an opinion, he will often lean your way - as long as he feels in charge and feels that he is the strongest alpha male in the room.  However, it is much harder to manipulate someone like Pence, as his currency is power. Pence is smart enough to wait around until someone self destructs. And that's what Trump seems to be doing, seeing how much work and thought goes into being president.

- - - - - -

But I go back to the title of this entry, as it raises an important question: Is it in our best interest to help get Trump out of office, taking an immediate gain? Or, is it better to help Trump stay in office until the 2018 elections, preventing a potential President Pence from serving more than 6 years as President in his own right?  Can we afford the damage that Trump will do to this country in a little under than 720 days?  

I've already accepted that Trump will destroy as many external checks and balances as he can, regarding those we have on large businesses.  I've already accepted that Trump will be a disaster for the environment, given his belief that Global Warming is a Hoax.  And I've already accepted that he will be a disaster for human rights. Do we know ALL the risks of removing him from office either via impeachment or via the 25th amendment to the constitution?  I don't think so.  And that worries me.

A modest border proposal

Like our president, I want to build a wall along the border with Mexico. But I don't want to build a wall that separates our peoples, but builds links of friendship across the border. 

- - - - - -

There is a famous play about two men who build a fence between their properties.  They both wanted their children to want to get to know each other, and they figured that the fence would get their kids interested in knowing each other.  It's a famous musical, and one well worth seeing if you get the chance. But I'll be darned if I can remember the name of that play now.

Since this wall is to be built for purposes of friendship, I propose using both Mexican and American children (of various ages, all under adult supervision) to build this wall as play, using Legos as their prime building material.  The wall would be 50 Meters long, by 1.5 Meters high, and 20 Centimeters thick. At the center would be an American hand shaking a Mexican hand in friendship. This wall would be the first wall built to bring people together, and not keep them apart from each other.

- - - - - -

Our current president wants to force Mexico to pay for a wall that its people do not want. He has just suggested that he is thinking of sending our troops South of the border to deal with "Bad Hombres" in Mexico. Is this the way to make friends?  I doubt it. Our Southwest was settled by people of both Anglo and Mexican heritage. And it's about time we stopped being the bully, and treated our next door neighbor with respect.

Something that most people don't realize is that there is already a wall along parts of the USA/Mexico border. It hasn't solved out problems with Mexico, it has only made them worse.  If we were to build Trump's wall along the border, we'd spend at least $25 billion for materials alone - and that doesn't account for the cost of labor.  Is it worth the price?

One might say, what about all those people crossing the border?  We have a right to keep them out. And this is a valid point. But many Mexican illegal aliens are moving back to Mexico for reasons of opportunity. NAFTA has helped Mexico develop, and we no longer have as big a problem with illegal immigrants crossing that border as we once did.  Instead, we're being infiltrated by illegals flying in from overseas, then overstaying their visits. And our President's proposed wall does absolutely nothing to stop them.  Instead, he's making a symbolic gesture which will accomplish little in the long run.

- - - - - -

Another person might focus on drug smuggling and other crimes which involve border crossing.  And to them I say that we should rationalize our laws. Making recreational drugs illegal has only served to act as a price support.  Berkeley Breathed (of "Bloom County" fame) made a point of this when a "hair growth tonic" was made illegal, and h ad Opus say "thanks for the price support". He then made jokes about all the ways drugs could be smuggled in, and showed how stupid many of these laws are.  To me, the only way to beat a narco mafia is to legalize and regulate such substances, killing off the profit margins.

How many people know that the laws against Marijuana were written to deny Mexican Americans their presumed drug of choice?  In the early days of the 20th century, Opiates were banned to deny Asians a recreational drug. And in the 1930's, Marijuana was banned to deny Blacks and Mexicans their fun.  Booze was made the only recreational drug available to the masses after prohibition ended - and we suffer from that decision today.

The Narco Mafia understands that drug bans only serve to increase their profit margins. But they have had a perverse side benefit.  They now take people from South of Mexico, move them through Mexico, and use these people to deliver their drugs into the USA.  They have taken over the "Coyote" trade, and have little interest in delivering people safely across the border to their final destinations. They have found another business where government provides them with price supports.

- - - - - -

If the problem is with the illegal alien, then we must do two things.  First, we must deal with the 12 million illegals already here. And for them, I want one last amnesty using the model established under Reagan's presidency.  But I do not want these people to ever become American citizens. Instead, I want them to be "green card" holders, so that they do not disrupt American politics in my lifetime.  Second, we must prevent new illegals from finding work, making it a criminal offense to hire (or otherwise employ) people who are not citizens or green card holders. And we must mandate the use of technology that would allow an employer to verify that a person has the legal right to work here. (We could also offer a bounty for those who lead the government to a successful prosecution of employers who violate this law.)

Americans need to feel secure.  And Trump's wall only provides an illusion of security. However, true friendship can provide the security we need, as friends can and will look out for each other....

A distraction and a risk

When the author of this blog was growing up, a 6 oz. bottle of Coke cost only 5 cents. 50 years later, the same 6 oz. bottle would sell for 50 cents, if that bottle were still available. (The 12 oz. can usually sells for $1.00 in many outlets, so I use that for my comparison.) Even if my prices are off a little, the price of most optional consumables has gone up by a factor of 10 since I was a child.

Inflation is the thief that robs us all without immediate pain. Governments tend to spend more money than they take in via taxes, and quietly run the printing press to repay creditors with inflated currency. America has done this several times in our history, most notably during the Great Depression, when we changed the price of an ounce of gold from $20 to $35, and then confiscated the gold in American citizens' hands. 

The second time America raped its currency was during the Vietnam war. Instead of taxing the public, and openly dealing with the costs of this unneeded war, we issued debt that would be paid off with cheaper currency. And our government got into the habit of printing money, inflating the currency, until we had short term interest rates approaching 18%. When credit card debt isn't expensive, the economy has serious problems. And we did have them in the late 1970's and early 1980's, where Jimmy Carter had to slam the brakes on the economy to prevent hyperinflation from kicking in.  (Of course, Ronald Reagan got the credit here, as actions of one president often show results in the next president's term.)

Today, we're seeing a great distraction taking place. Our president has decided that the public wants a stronger military (rah, rah, rah for our team - yeah, right!) and is willing to spend money that we don't have.  During his campaign, he posed a question which is very dangerous for the issuer of the world's settlement currency - why doesn't America renegotiate its debt, and settle for pennies on the dollar? Many people have forgotten that question, but I haven't. What will happen if he decides to pay back creditors with cheaper dollars?  

70 years after World War 2, the world now has several decent options for a settlement currency of choice, the dollar being only one of them. The other two possibilities of note are the Euro and the Chinese Yuan. Any nation or zone that issues the dominant settlement currency has a distinct advantage, as its businesses have an easier time dealing with currency risk. And that results in lower costs for the nation/zone, resulting in a higher standard of living for people within that nation/zone.

Can we afford another round of inflation?  No.  But based on historical trends, we will likely see one with disastrous effects. Hopefully, I am wrong, as there are a lot more people living on fixed incomes now than when I was a child, and they are much less able to afford the risks of inflation.