Tag Archives: both sides

The Fork in the Road to Democracy or Dictatorship

Leave a reply

An article published in The Hill suggests that Donald Trump’s promises that if re-elected he will engage in violent retribution against his enemies have inspired members of Congress to breach protocol and almost come to blows. Trump’s violent talk shows signs of taking over Congress  https://tinyurl.com/djbp5rss Those threats are, of course, among many other Trump/GOP assaults on the centuries-old system of American democratic government.

The article was inspired by a first-term Republican Senator from Oklahoma challenging the president of the Teamsters union to a fistfight in a hearing. The article also reports that Mitt Romney had much to say about the situation, noting the self-evident fact that “the Republican Party has become the party of Trump.” Romney, the master of understatement when it comes to criticizing looney Republicans, said the fight challenge was “clearly unfortunate.” Bold stuff from the man who in 2016 had said that Trump was “worthless”, a “fraud”, and that “he’s playing the American public for suckers: he gets a free ride to the White House and all we get is a lousy hat.” https://tinyurl.com/5dsvuy5x

Romney, you will recall, promptly bent the knee to president-elect Trump to seek a Cabinet post – which was, of course, denied. Trump knows how to treat “disloyal” people.

The article notes that “Trump’s use of violent rhetoric has since become almost routine,” accurate except for the “almost” modifier. Trump now engages in violent talk every day, using language identical to that made famous by Adolf Hitler and other dictators of the past. GOP Trump loyalists aren’t concerned. Their plan to steal the 2020 election and stay in power didn’t work as they imagined but the playbook remains valid for their purposes. The 2024 election is just another chance for them.

When a politician tells you he wants to “take over” your country, you should believe him. Trump aspires to fascist domination of the entire federal and state government apparatus. Republican politicians are so busy trying to avoid Trump’s wrath that they continue to make “both sides” false equivalencies and to equivocate about what is really happening. One example is Republican Senator Mike Rounds:

 It’s not the route that I’d like to see any of us go,” … I understand the reason why there was anger.

both individuals should have had a different approach to resolving it.

you’re seeing folks on both sides of the political spectrum being less respectful of other people.

I don’t know if he changed [norms] or simply responded to what he saw from other people. I think he sensed that the American people were allowing this to go on, and he’s taken advantage of it, but it’s not the direction that I think our country should go.

Powerful stuff, those Republicans speak. I’m sure you didn’t miss the “both sides” he snuck in there. Brings to mind Trump’s comment about the Nazi march in Charlottesville: “very fine people, on both sides.” The Post article goes on to cite other incidents including one in which former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) was accused of elbowing another Republican representative in the back.

The First Amendment and the associated long history of American acceptance of “free speech” allow for this kind of violent rhetoric in the absence of an imminent threat of violence by the speaker or someone in league with him. That is what happened on January 6. We now learn from Mediaite.com that Republicans are cheering the release of previously withheld security footage from January 6 because they have somehow reached the conclusion that it shows police collusion and thus sustains their belief that the entire episode was an “inside job” by the “left.” Trump Supporters Cheer Release of Jan. 6 Footage Showing Trump Supporters Storming the Capitol  https://tinyurl.com/bderutcr

Republicans have learned nothing. And some of the January 6 Capitol-desecrators have recanted their professions of error and remorse that were used performatively for compliant judges to secure lesser sentences. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-66169914

Many questions leap to mind. One of the most prominent is whether American corporations are going to continue playing deaf and dumb while spraying advertising dollars and PAC contributions on rightwing Republican candidates. Historically, American corporations, armed with “personhood” by the Supreme Court Citizens United case, have tried to have it both ways. Those days must end now. If the corporate community is indifferent to the fate of American democracy, consumers must show them the consequences by withholding purchases.

Donald Trump and his supporters have made clear their intention to destroy the American administrative state that accounts for massive amounts of economy-stimulating expenditures while assuring that the worst short-term instincts of capitalism are at least to some degree regulated in the public interest. Trump has, for example, made clear he will wreck the civil service system to assure that only workers completely loyal to him have federal jobs.

The United States is not alone in the world. Among numerous others, Russia, under the complete control of dictator Vladimir Putin, is waiting for an opportunity to strike a fatal blow against this country. Trump has previously subordinated himself to Putin in open displays of obsequious submission. Once Trump is back in power, Putin will have a free hand. At the end of the day, Putin, whom Trump openly admires, is no different than Josef Stalin and Adolf Hitler.

I had occasion recently to be reminded of some of James Madison and Alexander Hamilton’s more salient observations about government in the Federalist Papers that helped secure ratification of the Constitution. Some of the more relevant ones include:

The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.
― James Madison, Federalist Papers

It has been frequently remarked, that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country to decide, by their conduct and example, the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not, of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend, for their political constitutions, on accident and force.
― Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers

On the other hand, it will be equally forgotten that the vigor of government is essential to the security of liberty; that, in the contemplation of a sound and well-informed judgment, their interest can never be separated; and that a dangerous ambition more often lurks behind the specious mask of zeal for the rights of the people than under the forbidden appearance of zeal for the firmness and efficiency of government. History will teach us that the former has been found a much more certain road to the introduction of despotism than the latter, and that of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people; commencing demagogues, and ending tyrants.

― Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers

If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the people, whose creature it is, must appeal to the standard they have formed, and take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution as the exigency may suggest and prudence justify.
― Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers

To judge from the conduct of the opposite parties, we shall be led to conclude that they will mutually hope to evince the justness of their opinions, and to increase the number of their converts by the loudness of their declamations and the bitterness of their invectives. An enlightened zeal for the energy and efficiency of government will be stigmatized as the offspring of a temper fond of despotic power and hostile to the principles of liberty. An over-scrupulous jealousy of danger to the rights of the people, which is more commonly the fault of the head than of the heart, will be represented as mere pretense and artifice, the stale bait for popularity at the expense of the public good.
― Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers

Déjà vu All Over Again – We’ve Learned Nothing

1 Reply

Minneapolis burns. Los Angeles. Memphis, Louisville. Others.

A police officer in full view of multiple people, including store surveillance cameras, calmly kills an unarmed, non-resisting person accused of trying to pass a fake $20 bill. The unarmed, non-resisting man is a big man, imposing stature, but not resisting. His hands are in cuffs behind his back. The police officer forces him to the ground on his face, or maybe he sits down on his own. Maybe he said something offensive or even threatening. So what? He is cuffed and defenseless. The officer places a knee on the man’s neck. The man complains “I can’t breathe.” Multiple times. The officer ignores him. The other three officers on the scene ignore him. Witnesses plead with the police to check the man, but they are ignored. The man stops breathing. Still the police officer sits on his neck. The man dies.

The man dies in the presence and under the complete control of FOUR ARMED POLICE OFFICERS EQUIPPED WITH PEPPER SPRAY, TASERS, CLUBS, SIDEARMS. IF the man said something threatening to the officer OR IF the man did “resist” by passively dropping to the ground, under what police procedure and training did one of the four officers to think that the appropriate response was to sit on the man’s neck until he died? Is it even conceivable that police procedure condones this practice? Anywhere in the United States?

The prosecutor goes on TV and says there is “other evidence” indicating no crime was committed. What evidence? No comment. Why, then, did the prosecutor think it was a good idea to tell everyone he already had doubts about what virtually every non-racist person on the planet believed was almost certainly a crime – the deliberate taking of a life without justification under color of authority? Again.

All four of the officers have been fired so they are not among the strike force of hundreds of police now sent to suppress the, surprise, rioting and looting that have broken out in the wake of yet another “good people on both sides” scenario. The police use tear gas, pepper spray, fire hoses, among other things, against the crowds of enraged protestors.

Many people who were silent in the immediate aftermath of the video releases that at least raised a presumption that a police officer had, for the how-manyieth-time, killed an unarmed, non-resisting black person have come out clutching their pearls over the terrible rioting and looting. Sure, there may have been a problem with the police conduct – maybe, who knows, there could be an explanation, let’s wait for all the evidence, don’t jump to conclusions –but rioting and looting? Outrageous. Taking property? Unacceptable. Must meet force with force. Law and order. Restore peace by whatever means. Call out the National Guard.

And if you’re the president of the United States, what do you do? Well, our current president calls people names, threatens to “take control” with the military and “when the looting starts, the shooting starts.” Here is part of Trump’s actual message:

These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!

You don’t need a degree in linguistics to get the president’s message: “I will declare martial law and I approve of the National Guard/military shooting protesters who are rioting and looting. That’ll show ‘em who’s the boss.”

The victim here was a black man named George Floyd. His name joins the pantheon of unarmed black people killed by police in circumstances where other means of addressing the “situation” were readily available. Often the “situation” is really just that a black or brown-skinned person was involved. Involved in the sense of just being there. Despite the availability of other options, the police in these cases chose the lethal option. It’s not an accident. It’s a choice. And in virtually every case, the police are exonerated. There have been a few exceptions, but precious few.

The officer who killed George Floyd had 18 complaints on his record. One of the other four had six complaints and was involved in a settled lawsuit alleging use of excessive force among other things. https://cnn.it/2M8R3mm

All four officers in the present case have been fired. Fine, but not enough. Not even close. They will no doubt face civil suits whether or not the City of Minneapolis takes action against them. Why they are still at large is unknown and inexplicable on the known facts. Reminds us of the initial reaction of authorities in Georgia to the killing of Ahmaud Arbery. The “there is other evidence” position of the prosecutor is very close, too close, to “good people on both sides,” the president’s unsubtle endorsement of the neo-Nazis in Charlottesville. The mind boggles at the thinking behind the prosecutor making such a statement while refusing to describe the evidence. But, rest assured, he will study this case really hard and be sure the law is followed. Rest assured.

While you’re waiting for the prosecutor, think about this. What would the operative difference be if, instead of kneeling on Floyd’s neck, the policeman had rolled him over, pinning his cuffed hands under his body, sat on his chest and choked him to death with his fingers? Any real difference?

The Minnesota GOP had plenty to say about the beaches being closed due to the coronavirus pandemic, but I can’t find anything they have had to say about the killing of George Floyd. No doubt, they are “extremely concerned” that there has been violence and property loss. They likely joined the Trump-led GOP chorus of outrage at Colin Kaepernick peacefully protesting by kneeling at a football game during the playing of the National Anthem. They can’t have it both ways. Peaceful protest – Noooo! Riots and looting – Noooo! The real message, obvious to me and others, is, “don’t be black.”

As a society, if that term still applies, we appear to have learned nothing. Armed racists threaten legislators over pandemic lockdown and masking policies, and no one lifts a finger. Police are expected, and do, stand in rows while being screamed at by AR-15 carrying vigilantes complaining about their “rights.” No one is arrested. In Minneapolis, on the other hand, today’s protesters were pepper sprayed by the driver of a passing police car for no discernable reason except a “take that” attitude by an unhinged and uncontrolled police force. The officers surely know they are being filmed but they are not concerned there will be repercussions if they wantonly attack protesters.

I get that police are under a lot of stress. I support the police almost all the time, but not when unarmed black and brown people are killed and there were readily available alternatives to the use of deadly force. Police are supposedly trained and re-trained on the use of deadly force. Presumably their calm under stress is evaluated carefully before they are unleashed on the community carrying an array of weaponry, some of which can be used to kill. Or maybe not. Maybe in Minneapolis and the countless other places where these violations of human rights have occurred the police are not really trained. They are just armed and sent into the community with instructions to “keep the peace” however they choose. Is this possible?

In the George Floyd case, ironically and painfully, the police didn’t need to use anything but handcuffs to kill a man. We have learned nothing from all the prior cases. And the president of the United States just fans the flames with hostile rhetoric, showing yet again his complete unfitness to hold office. Still, the Grand Ole Party is apparently silent. They sat silently and voted to acquit Trump when he was impeached for extorting a foreign government, allowing him to withhold relevant evidence and witnesses. They sat silently while Trump’s henchman Attorney General William Barr lied and distorted the Mueller Report. They preach law and order while the president’s immigration policy separates families and leaves small children parentless, in some cases forever, locking them in cages in concentration camps.

This is but a small sample of what Republican leadership has created in America. All the racism can’t be blamed on them, but they have endorsed and facilitated it over and over. And when the police yet again kill an unarmed and defenseless black person, they sit silently until their leader speaks and incites further hatred, dividing the country even further.

How long does the white conservative establishment think the underclass which is huge and growing is going to continue to tolerate this blatant racism and discrimination? Do they not understand that when large numbers of citizens no longer feel invested in the established order and peaceful change of that order is foreclosed, they lose their connection to that society and their justified but ignored and resisted rage boils over? How long do they think this can continue without serious and violent consequences becoming the order of the day, as the unwarranted killings of unarmed black and brown people has become the order of the day?

November is coming, not soon enough, but it’s coming. The good people of this country had better put an end to the Republican leadership that has brought us to this place. The consequences of failure are too grim to imagine, but it seems certain that the failing light of democracy that, at least in principle, was the founding dream and aspiration of this country will be extinguished if change is not achieved. That sounds apocalyptic, I know, but don’t believe it can’t happen here. It can and it will, unless we stop it. ENOUGH!