Recently, the Wisconsin Supreme Court overturned the governor’s shut-down and stay-at-home order during the coronavirus pandemic. Wisconsin of late has been in a state of partisan political infighting between the two in-breeding political bases for some time. We now have masked-armed men walking around state capitals either intimidating the democratic process or trying to overthrow it–or at least unmask the sinister aspects of a deep state.
What got my squirrel running was not armed men on the capitol steps but that one of the Wisconsin Supreme Court was comparing the stay-at-home order to President Franklin Roosevelt’s executive order to intern Japanese American citizens in 1942. I sort of get the analogy to question governmental power that could force its citizens either out of their homes or to stay at home during a crisis. And this pandemic racing around the world is a crisis. They pondered what would stop the government from ordering people out of their homes and into “centers where are they are properly social distanced in order to combat the pandemic?”
I think that from a legal and political standpoint the Japanese internment might look like a good one to compare the stay-at-home orders; but I think there is a much better example. Instead of citing Korematsu v U.S., as an example of excessive government power. The court should have used was Edgar Allan Poe’s The Mask of the Red Death. It demonstrates the consequences of sheltering-in-place during a pandemic better than interning Japanese Americans during a war.
It was not a stay-at-home order for the 120,00 Japanese Americans interned during WWII but a 1942 order saying grab your stuff and go.
Poe’s Red Death has a pandemic ravaging the countryside. Prince Prospero and large group of his costumed-noble friends are sheltering-in-place in his fortified castle. It has all the hallmarks of Florida hurricane party up until the roof flies off and the flood waters pour through the door. In this case, its when disguised Death shows up. Prospero, with dagger in hand, chases the black shrouded death figure demanding to know who dares interrupt the festivities. The Prince pursues the black shrouded figure through the six rooms of the castle and into the most sinister room: the seventh room. This room is lite up by a scarlet light and decorated in black. It is here where Prospero and his masquerading guest unveil the dark figure before the ticking clock. When he is unmasked there is nothing revealed but an empty costume. The prince and his guest are infested with the red death and die leaving “Darkness and Decay and the Red Death” holding court in the castle.
The Wisconsin court could be saying is it is time to get the fraze out of the house! But they were citing Korematsu v U.S. as a reason to unbolt the doors. Fred Korematsu was a 23 year-old Japanese-American citizen was balking at leaving home and hearth for the wilds of Wyoming or the piney woods of Arkansas, the far off places that Japanese Americans were being interned.
Korematsu’s case went to the Supreme Court where he lost and had to load up the homestead. What makes his situation a tad different from today is that it had strong racial implications. Roosevelt’s order singled out Japanese Americans. The coronavirus is not singling out people for their race, religion or gender–maybe income level. The Supreme Court basically said that Korematsu’s case was not really a constitutional racial discrimination case. And since we were at war with Japan there was the possibility of espionage and sabotage, military matters trump civil rights.
All of this paints a dark dystopian image of what could happen when “they” come for you. It becomes spine chilling when we think that it could happen here. But it has.
The root of today’s protests over the stay-at-home orders has nothing to do with race or rights or who is masked or unmasked. It is about the mass disruption of business. If average Joe was offered corporate bailout money or a Powerball jackpot winnings to stay at home and wear a mask nobody would be complaining. If there is no money on the table then there is no trump in the deck. And with the GOP Senate dealing the cards it’s always Jacks or better to open.
But our history is laced with stay-at-home orders and lock down orders. Conservative business types have known all about internment to make a buck. Take the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire in 1911. A fire broke out in a dustbin of a multi-storied New York building where more than 500 people, mostly immigrant women, were working in locked down conditions. When the fire was finally put out a 146 were dead — 53 jumping to their death.
For some in the locked down building jumping was the only way out.
Southern plantation owners know about keeping workers at home, too. They practiced forced interment for centuries to make a buck. Their stay-at-home orders for African Americans made them and the country millions. When threatened to open up their plantations they armed themselves; went to their respective state capitals; and decided to go war and hang onto their internment camps and keep their racial stay-at-home policies. This turned out to be a failed plan. It would create a century long economic downturn and lead to a second wave flaring up 100 years later.
Interned Southern workers not keeping social distances in 1862.
All three of these events targeted specific groups of people to be confined–and it was not for public health reasons or civil liberties. The last two were just for money. I am not a legal scholar but I think it would be safe to say that most today’s state stay-at-home orders are not targeting a specific group of people. Unless you consider the poor and those over 65 hunkering down in nursing homes or at home in their rocking chairs binge watching Netflix as a targeted group.
The Covid-19 pandemic has been sometimes been referred to as a war.President Donald Trump once referred to himself as a wartime president. But despite more than 60,000 deaths, 30 million people out of work and armed protesters mobbing state capitols, we are not really at war. If this were a narrative conflict plot line in a novel or a movie it would be man versus nature. War is a man versus man affair.
First off, we cannot take this war-like analogy literally because people start wars. According to Cambridge dictionary war is “armed fighting between two or more countries or groups.” Globally we have not stooped to that–at least not yet.
Pandemics on their own do not start wars or declare war.Wars in most cases cause death and destruction, disease and pestilence, food shortages and a complete disruption of normal life as well as disruptions in business and other economic activities.
It is true that the Covid-19 has killed many around the globe, disrupted our daily lives andour economic activities.Unemployment is heading to an all new high. But what we are really talking about is attacking a virus with a war-like attitude. And right now our sheltered-in-place tactics are more of a siege mentality that is frustrating some.The virus is like an attacking foe that surrounds the castle and everybody digs in. But when you look over the parapet you do not see a surrounding army. Some people, however,haveleft the castle and taken to the streets in protest to this strategy and the economic devastation it has wrought. This introduces a side conflict of man versus government to reopen business. I am not sure how this tactic of reopening business neutralizes the coronavirus’s effects of just plain old death.
One thing that really hasn’t happened is a nationwide call to arms.The call to arms has been left up to governors of individual states who are now starting to catch blow back for shutting down their states and how to reopen them.A Wednesday night bowling alley league mentality seemes to have embraced us more than a logical then our nationwide coronavirus strategy.
Dudley Castle: Once a formidable place to shelter-in-place. Not so much now.
In war one of the first things that is needed to rally the nation is to demonize your enemy not your comrades.In most cases this is not too hard to do.We fall into it very easily. Our enemy’s activities can easily paint them as worthy barbaric opponent that needs to be totally defeated.
For instance, on the build up to World War IIduring the Sino-Japanese War in December of 1937, Japanese General Matsui Iwane decided to destroy the Chinese capitol Nanking in what would later be called the Massacre of Nanking or the Rape of Nanking. It was estimated that Japanese soldiers killed between 30,000 and 400,000 civilians and captured Chinese soldiers.A huge discrepancy but who was really counting those killed at the time. Japanese troops even used some POWs for live human bayonet practice. After World War II General Iwane was tried, convicted and executed for war crimes. No one was ever convicted of a war crime for shutting down a beauty salon unless…
In December of 1938, a year after the Rape of Nanking,in Germany, Nazi Stormtroopers wouldlead parading Germans through the streets of Germany in Kristallnacht, destroying Jewish homes, business, hospitals and synagogues.Thirty thousand men were arrested.Sometimes an enemy is so easily demonized that it leaves no choice but to go to war.
But how do you demonize a microscopic virus? Covid-19 is more akin to a science fiction novel like Michael Crichton’sAndromeda Strain, hence the man versus nature conflict. In this book and film scientists are battling some sort of extraterrestrial microbe. The microbe was brought back from space by a military satellite.The microbe gets loose and ends up killing all but two people in an Arizona town. This makes for a good story but it is also where the coronavirus becomes goofy with a variety off-the-wall cures and conspiracy theories. This leads us into good demonizing entertainment and alternative realities. This has us pointing fingers. A juicy conspiracy theory needs a few grains of truth to fly around the “not me but you” circle of finger pointers.With today’s talk radio and social media the theories have left the starting blocks and are racing down the track. We go from a virus escaping a Chinese biological lab and then on to a wet market and off into the realm of all sorts of batty beliefs of political exploration.
Theories and rampant speculation are good for ratings and inciting the lunatic fringe. However, they sow confusion and hamper true science.One thing is sure, the coronavirus is the perfect stealth attacker.It stalks unaware humans much like the cloaked alien visitor that returns to Earth to hunt humans. Arnold Schwarzenegger battled this bad guy in the movie Predator.
Since we cannot see the coronavirus it is hard to demonize it, let alone fight it. It is easier to turn our demons loose on human organizationsrather than the virus itself. Here is where the conspiracy theories come in. Some have tagged the World Health Organization or the Chinese as demons because the WHO is an over-funded United Nations organization and China because the virus originated there in some bat cave labrotory. But no matter what is said,it is the virus not the WHO or China causing the deaths.
One thing is certain the virus has been almost as lethal as the Japanese army was in Nanking. Here in the US the virus in about three months has killed more than 50,000 people with the death toll steadily moving upward.This is a horrific death toll has surpassed the total of combat deaths America suffered in Vietnam.Most Americans who lived through the Vietnam War remember the weekly death counts given on Friday night newscast.The worst week in Vietnam was February 11-17th during the Tet Offensive: 543 Americans were killed. According to The Washington Post those figures pale to the 12,392 Americans that died from the coronavirus between April 6 – 12. That is an average of more than 1,700 Americans dying in one day.And this count is just for the United States, forget Italy and Spain.
We have long surpassed the total American combat death level during the Vietnam War. I mention combat deaths because killing in war is a physical exercise. The coronavirus seems to kill with ease.The Vietnam War for Americans started with the Marines landing in Danang in March of 1965 followed with a steady escalation of millions of soldiers coming in and out of Vietnam until it ended with the last combat troops leaving Vietnam in March of 1973. According to the United States Archives 47,000 military personnel were killed in combat in Vietnam. And this does not include Vietnamese deaths. What took eight years of war the coronavirus is did in several months. The Vietnam War was an open-ended war with no real light at the end of the tunnel. There is speculation as to when we will flatten out the coronavirus death curve, a home for Christmas belief. However, fears of a fall and winter assault in fall leave us wondering are we in for a viral Battle of the Bulge. It leaves us wondering when will this come to pass.
Brits sheltering-in-place during the Blitz
What frustrated military planners in the Vietnam War was the inability to knock out key installations vital to the war effort. One government official likened the coronavirus as the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor. There are some similarities, I guess. But the Covid-19 does not have a command-and-control center planning its next assault. If the virus is trying to win a war, attacking one of our main front line installations is a strategic imperative as was Pearl Harbor in World War II.This was what the Japanese had hoped for at Pearl Harbor.
Destroying or controlling key facilities is essential in war. The coronavirus is incapable of this. All it really needs is a human host to control. However, it is assaulting our hospitals and degrading our medical personal. This will weaken our defenses and lead us open to unchecked attacks. The movie Independence Day had attacking aliens taking control of orbiting communication satellites to attack Earth. Once the satellites were captured it was like cracking an egg open for frying. Ironically, in that movie it was technological virus that brought the aliens down. Our problem is that it will take some time to come up with a vaccine for the virus. The only defense is to hunker down like Londoners spending the night in the Tube during the Blitz.
During the waning days of World War II more than 1,300 Allied heavy bombers went on fa our day bombing spree, dropping nearly 4,000 tons of high-explosive and incendiary bombs on Dresden that created a firestorm that destroyed nearly 1,700 acres of the city and killing well over 23,000 people.
Fortunately, the coronavirus has spared us the wanton wholesale destruction that war brings. When we wake up in the morning there is no disbelief of coming up from a night of sheltering-in-place as if we were coming up from the air raid shelter and seeing the rubble that was once our neighborhood destroyed from last night’s bombing.
But here is an alternative theory.Maybe Donald Trump is a wartime leader and maybe this is a life or death struggle between man and nature.Maybe this is war. The coronavirus is just one of nature’s weapons waging a war along with killer hurricanes and raging wildfires.This is not a geopolitical, economic or cultural war.It could be a war of revenge.
The plastic seaborne invasion hitting the beaches. A million year D-Day.
Just maybe this is one phase of nature’s counter attack for 30,000 years of human assault on the Earth.Maybe it is payback for hunting species to extinction for feathered hats or shoes; pumping millions of gallons of toxic chemicals into rivers and oceans for plastic bags; dumping millions of tons of garbage into landfills and polluting the skies with carbon and other carcinogenic pollutants and greenhouse gases for a two-SUV garage; or leaving floating islands of plastic bottles to circle the oceans for a million years. Maybe this is nature’s way of telling us to cool it for a while, stay at home, and give the Earth a few months to catch its breath.
With the passage of the $2 trillion coronavirus stimulus package it made me wonder where did all those fiscal deficit hawks fly off to. When the whole country falls into the category “too big to fail” the wallet really opens up. And some economists and financial gurus say it might not be enough. It appears that our governments, state and federal, are overwhelmed on how to move forward in dealing with the pandemic we are facing.
In this shelter-in-place time I found myself taking longs walks. On one of these walks through my neighborhood I came across a lawn filled with political yard signs for the up and coming primary elections. One sign in particular piqued my imagination in today’s pandemic. It was a sign with no candidate’s name posted, just initials, and no party affiliation. It simply said “Constitutional Conservative.” And I thought what is a Constitutional conservative and considered what President Bill Clinton said in his impeachment defense “It depends upon what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”
The conundrum I had with the sign was that it was next to two red signs: one proclaiming “Make America Great Again” (which makes me wonder when we became not great– maybe just after the first case of coronavirus); and the second red sign simply advertising “Trump 2020.” Nothing personal against President Trump but I never really considered him Constitutional anything. More of Constitutional Compass in a magnetic storm. But the signs did give me a rough bearing to follow.
It is not my intention to to weigh in on the pros and cons of the Trump Administration or rehash the last three years of political discourse or even the last three months. Much wiser men and women have taken that cross upon their shoulders. However, what I find puzzling is how to reconcile the past three years; or any three years after the approval of the Constitution for that mater, with the term “Constitutional Conservative. ” As far as I know this could be a marketing scheme, a sort of joint branding taking place between a nebulous (or obvious) group of Constitutional Conservatives and the Trump name Maybe its just political happenstance like the Whig party and the Know Nothings way back in the 1850s. We may ask ourselves, How did that work out?
This makes me wonder what Constitutional conservative means in the crisis we are now in. Does a strict view of the Constitution have any bearing on what is going on? In a time of crisis the Constitution tends to get stretched. Abraham Lincoln took liberties expanding the traditional role of the presidency. His views on secession differed with the Constitutional viewpoint of say his counterpart, Jefferson Davis, who looked at the Union as a compact of states that could be undone. And Lincoln really waded into constitutionality with his Emancipation Proclamation freeing slaves in states that left the Union or were in open rebellion against the Union. But Lincoln kept it all within the guideposts of the rule of law. Lincoln knew the law and he knew where he could bend it with out breaking it. But none the less, he took a lot of heat from the Democrats for the way he conducted the war .
Our Constitution calls for a bicameral legislative body and a Supreme Court to interpret what is constitutional. Nowhere in the Constitution does it mandate a two party system. Unlike other countries with a multitude of parties, particularly those with a Parliamentary form of government, when an election has no majority winner, then various parties come together to form a majority coalition to run the government, as in the recent elections in Israel. Here, in the US, third party ideas get absorbed into one of the main parties. The Tea Party movement, for example, got pulled into the GOP like a black hole sucking in a nearby planet. Unlike a black hole, where we are not sure what comes out the other end, here on terra firma we get to see the end results.
Arizona Senator, Barry Goldwater, the face of the conservative movement in the 1960s.
So who or what is a Constitutional Conservative? Right off the bat I would say Alexander Hamilton or George Washington. Washington simply because he was the president of the Constitutional Convention and the first President of the United States. Doing a quick internet search, George’s name does not pop up as Constitutional Conservative. This, despite, the many references to the “intent” of the Founding Fathers. Here again, no Washington but you will find Senator Barry Goldwater and President Ronald Reagan’s smiling faces popping up as disciples of original intent.
From what I can glean a Constitutional Conservative is somebody who believes in in low or no taxes, limited government, Christian family values, and sees liberals as a threat to American Exceptionalism. I am going to stop there on American Exceptionalism because that is another political black hole concept that is easy to fly into with no idea where you will come out–that is if you come out. In the short, it looks like the old belt buckle proclaiming God, guns and guts–let’s fight to keep all three.
Once again, it is not my intention to deride conservative values. But when it comes to taxes what American in their right mind would turn down the option of legally not paying taxes? Just look at the lengths the current president has gone to keep his tax returns secret. It’s called tax evasion. Evading taxes is like avoiding the coronavirus–shelter your returns in a safe place. Remember, tax evasion is how the Feds got Al Capone.
We also have to remember we are a country founded on smugglers and tax evaders. The guy who signed his name so boldly to the Declaration of Independence, John Hancock, was one of the biggest tax cheats in the Colonies. I am sure if King George III could have gotten a hold of Hancock he would have done several eons in irons as a permanent resident of the Tower.
Washington marshaling troops to quash the Whiskey Rebellion. Now that there is representation taxation is not so easily evaded.
But avoiding taxes was not just for rich merchants. We even had western farmers in the early stages of the nation balk at taxes. The Whiskey Rebellion took place from 1791 to 1794 when farmers refused to pay newly levied taxes on whiskey. Before there was high fructose corn syrup and ethanol, there was corn liquor. A very lucrative way to turn surplus corn into cash. As a Constitutional Conservative, President George Washington, led an army out into Pennsylvania to collect the taxes and put the rebellion down in person.
One of the remarkable qualities of America, and its Constitution, is our Christian values that allowed us to set up a government where religion and politics tried to stay out of each others bailiwick or diocese. The questioning of one’s beliefs or no belief at all has not pillared anybody at a burning stake. Although there were some fanatical Puritans in pre-constitutional times roaming around in the late 1600s looking for witches. Here again Christian values have evolved through time with the rule of law. We no longer hunt witches or Irish immigrant papists down.
Chief Justice Roger B. Taney took a radical look at who was three-fifths of a person.
As for the “intent” of those who wrote the Constitution, eleven members of the convention were either slave owners or associated with the “peculiar institution” of slavery. This is the paradox of American exceptionalism. In one document we proclaim boldly “all men are created equal” and then in another we decide that some men will be considered “three-fifths of a person.” This seems arbitrary. But it is not. All that would change in the Dred Scott decision. Chief Justice Roger B. Taney’s court even went beyond a strict Constitutional conservative decision definitively saying that Dred Scott, a slave, had no rights at all under the Constitution. He turned Scott into property except when it benefited the purposes of their slave owners for tax purposes and representation. Taney and associates were no doubt following a close interpretation of the Constitution. But was this interpretation the intent of all the signers of the Constitution?
Even the founders found ways to get around a strict interpretation of the Constitution. Alexander Hamilton used the “necessary and proper” clause to get a national bank. It makes sense. Congress can coin money, set and collect taxes but there is no mention of banking. Hamilton reasoned that a bank was needed to put the nation’s money in. There was no Goldman and Sachs back then. No Federal Reserve and no quantitative easing.
As much as President Trump proclaims he is a great builder and developer Thomas Jefferson has him beat hands down with the Louisiana Purchase. Jefferson, who had a strict view of the Constitution, found no Constitutional way to get this land deal done. But there was a twist in the Constitution. The president can negotiate treaties. Looking beyond the limitations, Jefferson made the land deal with Napoleon a treaty. Then got Congress to approve it. Talk about the art of the deal.
And then there is Andrew Jackson. I am not sure if this populist president would fall into the Constitutional conservative file or not. He did not, however, look fondly upon Henry Clay’s concept of the American System. Clay proposed using tax revenues from tariffs for internal improvements such as roads, bridges and canals. Jackson felt that funding these sorts of projects, particularly Clay’s Maysville Road Bill that would tie various roads in Kentucky to the Ohio River and the Cumberland Road System, as unconstitutional. Jackson promptly vetoed the bill. Of course there was a deep political animosity between the two political rivals that grew throughout their public life.
It is interesting to note that 120 years later President Dwight Eisenhower took a completely different view. In 1956 Eisenhower signed one of the greatest infrastructure deals in history with the Federal-Aid Highway Act. This act create 41,000 miles of interstate highways with I-90 being more than 3,000 miles long running from Seattle to Boston.
So, I am not sure about strictly holding on to old ideas. There is some comfort in knowing rules hold up over time. But even baseball has changed. It has a Designated Hitter, football players don’t have to play both ways, basketball has a three point line; and to make sure every call is correct, we now have instant replay review. So much kicking for arguing and kicking dirt on an umpires shoes.
I often think that most people who spout off about the Constitution forget the Preamble part where the purpose of the Constitution is laid out. With all the yammering about abortion and gun rights we forget that the reason our government was founded was “to establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty.” It is a tall order without a doubt trying to meet these demands. Those who wrote the Constitution during that hot Philadelphia summer had no idea there would be space travel or instantaneous communication.
But now that we are engulfed in a pandemic maybe we should look to the Preamble of our Constitution as a beacon of hope. The government has the task of balancing justice, tranquility, and the general welfare all the while trying secure our liberties. Is this the time to take a 19th Century approach to a 21st Century problem? Or look forward to progress.
I was not around during the beginning of World War II when Germany invaded Poland in September of 1939. The Nazis had belief in the need for Lebensraum. Eminent domain was one of their many ethos that was backed up by force of arms. Simply put, they needed more living space and Poland and most of Central Europe was condemned property waiting to be re-developed
It is the post Polish invasion that reminds me of today’s battle with the coronavirus: Corvid-19. After Germany invaded Poland, France and England declared war on Germany. All sides sat around looking over their gun barrels for the next eight months in what was called a Phoney War. There were a few minor battles but all sides were content at this time to prepare. Britain began preparations for an aerial blitz that was sure to come. A conscription was put into place as well as rationing and the commandeering of public transportation for military use. The Phoney War put them at ease, and made them little disgruntled with government efforts in the lew of any real combat.
Allied troops sheltering in place
Despite the preparations neither side had any idea how this Phoney War turned out to be a life and death struggle. Little did France realize what would hit them in May of 1940. German tanks rolled through France and on to the Atlantic in less than a month pulling France down. The British barely had enough time to get their troops off the continent and began the process of sheltering in place on their island fortress .
Before I go on any further there is no way that I am comparing the Nazi swarm to a coronavirus–the Black Death maybe. But France and Britain had eight months to prepare for war in which they declared. And the way the Germans rolled them up makes you wonder how well they used that time getting ready for the inevitable, particularly after witnessing how quickly the German army and Luftwaffe–along with the Soviets–put Poland in a box.
What puzzles me is that we watched what happened in China as the coronavirus roared through Wuhan, a city of eleven million. And much like the British and French in 1939, we just looked with unmasked faces during the month of January and February watching and waiting as the coronavirus marched through Italy.
For most of our history as a nation the two oceans have protected us from all foreign enemies. These oceans may have even protected us to some extent from viral airborne invasions. But the global world in which we live events and diseases can jump oceans and continents over night. A slow moving local disease can now become a blitzkrieg.
It was not long before the United States was dragged into the world at war. Much like our other Allies we were not prepared for battle. To quote a turn-of-the century Secretary of Defense who said before launching the nation into a decade of war in the Mideast: “You go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time.”
Unfortunately, that is true and can be said about many things. But in World War II the United States got up from being sucker punched and began producing enough war material to supply not only our own armies but our Allies, too. It was Rosie the Riveter: “We can do it.”
It brings to mind the story of the aircraft carrier USS Yorktown. Badly damaged at the Battle of the Coral Sea, the Yorktown managed to get back to Pearl Harbor for repairs. Engineers determined it would take at least two weeks around-the-clock to make the repairs needed. The problem was Naval Intelligence discovered that the Japanese Imperial Navy was in the process of invading Midway Island. They did not have two weeks. Admiral Chester Nimitz told the Navy Yard that the Yorktown was needed and that they had two days to get the Yorktown out to sea. Much to the surprise of the Japanese navy, the Yorktown was there and played a significant role in America’s victory, a victory considered the turning point of the war in the Pacific.
During that war we were cranking out tanks, airplanes and ships by the thousands not to mention all the other necessities. I find it difficult to believe a country that could build a space program from the ground up, put a man on the moon and bring him back safely today cannot provide enough surgical masks, cotton swabs, and other simple medical needs to combat covid-19.
Granted, we might not have the necessary equipment now but in the past we could and did what needed to be done get the job done. We may be going to war with the health system we have, but that needs to change. It is time to step up the A(merican)-game. Instead of talking about making America great again, realize We can do it!
It is ironic that it was March 4, 1933 that Franklin Roosevelt gave his first Inaugural Speech. Most historically cognizant Americans may know only one thing from this speech and that is when Roosevelt told the country: “let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself.”
The difference between now and then is that in 1933 the country was in the grip of the worst depression or panic the country has ever faced. More than 25 percent of the work force was out of a job. Businesses took it on the chin, too, losing $6 billion. Six billion sounds like chump change today. And it sort of is. When you adjust the 1933 loss for inflation that is close to throwing $115 billion out the window today. Jeff Bezos alone is worth close to $120 billion.
Today, we are witnessing a stock market collapse that is a throw back to the last recession but this time we can add a little oil to the fuel as the energy markets melt down. And of course the pandemic virus adds to our economic woes with the possible overwhelming of our healthcare system.
A bank run during the Great Depression or as Yogi Berra would say “A nickel ain’t worth a dime anymore.” If you could get a nickel for your dollar.
Historians say that the Great Depression kicked off on October 24, 1929 during Herbert Hoover’s Administration when the stock market tanked. Five days later the Dow Jones Industrial had dumped 22 percent of its value. This was a time investment bankers saw their portfolios go out the window. Contrary to popular belief, only two people literally followed their investments out the window
That was just the start. The Hoover Administration’s laissez faire affair approach did not help. The idea of letting the markets do as they will was not working. By 1930 consumer confidence went out the window with the Dow Jones. Interest rates were at rock bottom levels. production fell as did wages. Before long the country was in a deflationary spiral. Demand for goods fell, prices fell, wages kept falling and so did the Gross Domestic Product. Some estimated it fell by 15 percent. And we argue about 2 percent growth in the GDP as being a bad thing. Are things sounding familiar?
In the 1928 Presidential campaign Hoover campaigned on the promise of a “chicken in every pot and a car in every garage.” Boy would those roosters come back to peck Hoover. That little slogan sounded good at the time but I am sure it did not play well when people started bum rushing banks trying to get their money out before banks defaulted. Forget about the car in the garage. When this was done people would be lucky to have a pot to piss in
Hands in pockets maybe but John D Rockefeller’s net wealth adjusted for today’s inflation was close to $420 billion.
Blaming Herbert Hoover for the Great Depression would be like blaming Donald Trump or even Barack Obama for the coronavirus. The 1930s global economy was global pandemic waiting to happen. It was cooking off like a steaming tea pot. Like the good business conservative Hoover was, he followed the belief of cheerful optimism that things are going to get better. And they usually do. But face it, when you have an old business tycoon worth $1.4 billion like John Rockefeller, probably the richest American ever, saying “These are days when many are discouraged. In the 93 years of my life, depressions have come and gone. Prosperity has always returned and will again.” And he was right. The business cycle is a double feature much like a roller coaster. It is a sure thing if it is going up at some point in time it will come back down and vice versa. However, for the out-of-work souls standing in a soup line that sounds encouraging but the real question was when. In the meantime, “brother can you spare a dime.”
Today’s creeping coronavirus and the collapse of the oil market has not created soup lines or a rush on hospital beds–yet. It is, however playing havoc with the fear factor.
In his first Inaugural Address not only did FDR address fear but he also said, “Only a foolish optimist can deny the dark realities of the moment.” The dark realities of the Coronavirus may be embedded in its DNA but its stark realities are more than likely going to manifest in our bastardized healthcare economic system. Much like the 1929 stock market and banking collapse our healthcare system is humming along making profits for insurance companies, medical companies, pharmaceuticals and just about anybody else who can tag on to the medical gravy train. The question is if this pandemic gets out of hand what will happen to this single-payer profit system. It’s not where the buck stops put who will pick up the check.
In the Democratic debates we have heard a lot about “progressive ideas” that to some, border on socialism; or worst communism. One campaign slogan: “Medicare for all” or “Universal Healthcare” already has people heading the Sheep’s Gate waiting for the stirring of the waters at the Pool of Bethesda to make them well of whatever disease they have.
Maybe one of the first National Healthcare Plans:The healing waters at the Pool of Bethesda
What Roosevelt stressed was a New Deal “because the rulers of the exchange of mankind’s goods have failed, through their own stubbornness and their own incompetence, have admitted their failure, and abdicated. Practices of the unscrupulous money changers stand indicted in the court of public opinion, rejected by the hearts and minds of men.” We might not be there yet when it comes to healthcare. But we could be one patient away from a run on hospitals.
Now far be it for me to say what is what in the Healthcare Industry. It does, however, seem to be a system run for and by “unscrupulous money changers.” I would venture that in the hearts and minds of most Americans there is some sort of agreement about changes to a system that favors profits over health. For some reason people are leery of a single payer national healthcare system. I think I can bastardize Churchill’s quote on capitalism and socialism by inserting the current healthcare system is the unequal sharing of blessings (profits) with the inherent virtues of the equal sharing of miseries (lack of actual care).
I am not advocating for a single payer government system. However, the idea of national health insurance is nothing new. FDR’s cousin Teddy Roosevelt, another reformer, was bouncing the idea around when he ran for president in 1912. Harry Truman tried unsuccessfully in 1945. John Kennedy floated the concept about, too. It was President Lyndon Johnson, a Roosevelt New Dealer, who managed to pull it off in 1965 for people over the age of 65. And here we are in 2020 debating the merits of Medicare for all.
At this moment there is a lot of speculation as to the short term and long term effect of the coronavirus on the world’s health as well as the economy. Some countries have taken drastic quarantine measures. China even built two coronavirus hospitals in one week. Granted, this pandemic could be like a 25 year storm, but if it becomes worse it could possibly swamp our healthcare system creating a real need for a “new deal.”
The recent impeachment debate reminds me of why those who wrote the Constitution kept the people as far away as possible from the seat of power. This, despite two of our nation’s founding and guiding documents that are laced with references to “we the people,”but are designed to keep angry farmers with pitchforks away from the county courthouse–as in Shay’s Rebellion. It was also designed to keep greedy despots and tyrants at bay with an impeachment clause.
The Declaration of Independence has slightly more than 1,400 words. The document is laced with words like fellow citizens, our coasts or we and us. And of course the curse phrase “all men are created equal.” This little phrase so succinct wrapped tight in the logic of Enlightenment gives us the indefensible “all” not “some” and no indication at all of the royal “we” but” all.” That little phrase has had this country back peddling on a lot issues starting with counting slaves as three-fifths of a person to women’s rights and immigrants rights. Somehow along the way we have managed to rope in non-people and corporate rights, into “We the People.” Go figure.
The Constitution starts out with “We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union…” telling us that government derives its just powers from the people. This is a unique concept that has evolved throughout the centuries but has yet come to full fruition. One of the greatest republics in history was the Roman Republic. It lasted almost 500 years from 509 BC to 27 BC. But the Romans, like the men who put our Constitution to paper, realized that it was vital to keep the masses as far away as possible from Forum. But yet, the Romans knew how to use the masses to manipulate “public policy” for personal gain. At times the Roman Republic was rocked with public mayhem, mob murder and several civil wars, which would have been impossible without “we the people.”
The big difference between the Roman Republic and ours is “We the people” is a fine example of well-reasoned rhetoric. After all, the men who crafted the new government and the Constitution were educated in the Age of Enlightenment or Reason, which came about 1,700 hundred years–give are take a decade or two–after the fall of the Roman Republic. The Roman Empire, however, lived on for another 500 years before falling like a straw castle to barbarian hordes whose public policy was pillage and personal gain.
Those who wrote our Constitution looked back to the Roman Republic and Athenian democracy to form a our new government, as witnessed in the Classic Roman-Greco architecture style of a lot of our public buildings. They took many of the ideas from Enlightened thinkers like John Locke, Montesquieu and Rousseau, as well. But between all of that, Western Europe experienced a heavy dose of feudalism. I am not sure if feudalism is more of social system than it is a form of government. To quote Merriam-Websters a government is “a small group of persons holding simultaneously the principal political executive offices of a nation or other political unit and being responsible for the direction and supervision of public affairs.”
King Henry the II, possibly the first feudal Plantagenet king that started a dynasty that ruled for more than 300 years.Here is where things get a bit murky: public affairs. Was there any consideration for public affairs in Medieval Europe? This social structure of the time started basically with one man at the top: the king or the crown. What makes public affairs questionable is that the crown handed out land to the nobility. The nobility in turn handed land down to the vassals who in turn worked the land with serf or peasant labor. Serfs were tied to the land in fealty to the lord and master. This quid pro quo was based on loyalty and obligation to the next guy up on the social rung with not a whole lot coming down. This required nobles to pony up knights, archers and pikemen in the crown’s defense in a semi-military society. This included peasants and any yeoman farmers, and the fruits of their labor, too.
Here is another hitch in this quasi military social structure. If we assume that a Medieval king was a government (unto himself) then the question is what is public affairs or in the public interest. Granted, we cannot impose 21st Century beliefs on 14th Century man. It is unfair. It would be easier said, that any sort of public interest or public policy was really the crown’s interest or what the king said it was. There were no polls in the field to gauge public perception on, say, going on a Crusade to the Holy Land; or the public’s views on the Hundred Year’s War where the English House of Plantagenet fought with the French House de Valois over who would rule France. And we think 20 years in Afghanistan is a stretch.
I wonder what a serf would care about who controlled France? Think about it, this is a person who lived and died five miles from where he was born. That is, unless he got dragooned into the front lines fighting Saracens. Then he probably had the opportunity to die hundreds if not thousands of miles from where he was born, in the interest of one man’s personal gain. Public policy was really how far a king could go in pursuing his own ambitions.
Eventually, the nobles got fed up with this sort fealty to the king. In 1215 a group of English noblemen sat King John down at Runnymede and had him sign the Magna Carta Libertatum, which translates from Latin the Great Charter of the Liberties. This is looked as a great moment in history when a group of men tried to check the unbridled power of a king. Interesting the Great Charter does not make too much reference to we the people: the serfs or the peasants. But it was a start and was just a speed bump in royal self-interest.
Pre-Constitutional impeachment processIf we move ahead about five centuries and shift continents to North America we witness a group of colonials trying to sit a truculent king down with the Olive Branch Petition to discuss their rights as British subjects. The king, being king, saw no advantage in discussing public policies with a group of rebellious, second-class colonial citizens. One thing that must have chafed the Crown was how the colonials used mobs to intimidate his tax collectors and other governmental officials, particularly in Boston. In 1715 the British Parliament passed what was officially known as “An Act for Preventing Tumults and Riotous Assemblies.” We simply know this today as “The Riot Act.” The Act allowed for the quick and speedy dispersal of any group of more than 12 people gathered on the street corner. I am not sure how effective this act was at curbing Boston’s Waterside gangs.
Nothing like a new coat of feathers and rope hanging from the Liberty Tree to change somebody’s opinion.
The Sons of Liberty in Boston, could sum up mobs almost at will. They could whip up a rowdy crowd comprised from either the Northend or Southend gangs. These gangs of out-of-work- sailors, rope walkers and local toughs could tar and feather some poor unfortunate British official, ride his feathered backside out of town and be in the Pub knocking back rum before sun down. This was sending out an intimidating message. It could be the precursor of “Don’t mess with the US.” The Sons of Liberty were very successful in manipulating public opinion with the use of “we the people.” But they were also well aware of the dangers of controlling the wild horses that were pulling their wagons.
There are two interesting points we can gather from the use of mobs to influence public policy. One, is that when it came time to write a Constitution, it was obvious that the people needed to be included, mobs and all. The question is how and what role do the people play in the process without giving them too much power that translates into mob mentality.
One of the ways to dilute the power of the people was the Electoral College. This way of electing the president was sort of letting the “we the people” in through the front door while showing us the back door quickly. The people, however, could elect local officials, members to the House of Representatives but not judges, senators or the president.
The second point is how do the people deal with an unresponsive government official without taking to the streets. The struggle with King George III taught them that they could not count on a loss of a horseshoe to unhorse a king. Hence, the new Constitution included Biennial elections. It also included an impeachment clause in Article I Section 2 Clause 5.
The one thing that those Enlightened thinkers did not incorporate from the Roman Republic was a Dictator. According to Encyclopedia Britannica a Roman dictator was “a temporary magistrate with extraordinary powers, nominated by a consul on the recommendation of the Senate and confirmed by the Comitia Curiata (a popular assembly).” It is interesting to note that a dictator was nominated and approved “only in times of military and later internal crises.” (It is interesting to note that this is how Hitler became Chancellor of Germany during a time of financial upheaval.)
In theory, a Roman dictator’s term was only six months or until the crisis passed. The Romans. like English colonials, had toppled Roman kings to form a republic. And like there past Republicans, American colonials feared the unbridled power of a king. The Romans, however, saw a need for one man taking charge in a crisis much like when Secretary of State, Al Haig, stepped in for the wounded President Ronald Reagan telling the American people “I am in control here.”
The problem is one man’s crisis could also be his opportunity. An opportunity that could be fudged as in the case of two of the more famous Roman Dictators Lucius Cornelius Sulla and Julius Caesar. Sulla was granted broad powers which included rewriting the constitution. But it was more in the unique way in which he went after his political rivals with proscription. This was a “judicial process.” All Sulla needed to do was simply post names of people he considered “deplorable.” These undesirables who got tagged with with the term “enemies of the state” risked losing everything including life and limb. According to the website UNRV.com Sulla’s rule became a bloody affair: “A reign of terror ensued with rewards offered for the death or capture of any name on the list.” The end result was “as many as 40 senators and 1,600 members of the equestrian class (the property owning social class just below senators) were murdered.”
For those who found themselves on the top of his hit list: “There was simply no place to hide or run. People taking refuge in the temples were murdered; others were lynched by the Roman mob. An intricate network of spies kept Sulla informed and at his whim, tracked down anyone who might be considered an enemy of the state.”
Caesar’s popularity as a dictator took a slightly different turn and ended up with him flat on the Senate floor, bleeding away the last remnants of a Republic, that eventually gave rise to the Roman Empire.
King Louis XVI doing the Perp Walk as his executioners prepare the Guillotine.
It should not come as a surprise that those Enlightened thinkers who wrote the Constitution put the beginning of the impeachment process in the people’s chamber of the Congress: The House of Representatives and not the Senate. It is interesting to note just about the time these Enlightened thinkers were writing our Constitution the reign of terror was being nurtured in the beginnings of the French Revolution. It was mob rule on steroids and guillotine. Four years after the ratification of our Constitution the French lopped the head off head of their king and displayed it for all to see.
The impeachment threshold is a major cliff to climb. And yes, it does nullify an Electoral College election, which sounds a hell of lot more civil than putting a ruler’s head on a pike. The Electoral College vote is one of the few elections in the world where having a majority of a popular vote can have you coming in second. Impeachment is the people’s way of rectifying an election through their representatives. It is “We the People” trying to rein in the reign of a president who may be acting more in his personal interest than the public’s. It is a way of keeping a waterside mob forming onto Boston wharf, storming onto the Beaver, Dartmouth, and Eleanor and chucking 342 tea chests into the harbor.
As Winston Churchill said: Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…
Recently, Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex and his wife Meghan said they were stepping back from their duties as “senior royals.” This has caused a stir and appears to be a major fissure oozing out ages of monarchical rule. It reminds me of the English ballad A World Turned Upside down. This was the ditty that Lord Cornwallis played as his soldiers marched out of Yorktown to surrender to a bunch of upstart colonials.
Our Lords and Knights, and Gentry too, doe mean old fashions to forgoe: They set a porter at the gate, that none must enter in thereat. They count it a sin, when poor people come in.
In today’s more democratic political climate the word conservative base or liberal base is being bandied about like a shuttlecock across a net in a badminton game. As this political shuttlecock flies it leaves a trail of conservative or liberal vortices that float invisibly down towards center court where the masses, the middle or the silent majority look up to see the little birdy fluttering by. In American politics it is said that elections are won, much like in chess, by controlling the center. I think that this a mistaken myth. It is a myth right up there with “toads cause warts.”
For centuries people lived in kingdoms, empires that were under the rule of some sort of paternal ruling elite whose real aim was to hold onto power and more than likely gave little thought to the masses in the middle and what they thought. It was a “let them eat cake” attitude. So when a pair of “royals” walk away from the castle much like his great uncle, King Edward VIII did for the love of a woman, it is a big deal. To rule over a nation as a king or a queen is considered a godly duty.
In the ancient kingdoms Pharaohs were gods. The Greeks took the gods and made them as human as possible while putting them high on Mount Olympus. The key to success in ancient Greece was don’t piss off the gods. The Romans took a different twist to it and made their human emperors divus or divine upon their death. This also included family members.
Then the ancient Hebrews changed things up with believing in one God. I guess maybe when they were tired of being ruled by a mish-mash of judges they demanded of God the need for one king. The prophet Samuel asked them are you sure about this? Think about it this before I hit send. Saul was God’s “anointed one” way back in 1000 BCE. This is a different take on the king being god. Saul was never a god but appointed by God.
King James I of England championed the idea of God’s grace in the ordination of kings. It put no earthly authority over him and hence, he was not subjected to his subjects. Only God could remove an unjust king. But then who gets to actually say what is unjust?
Saul, however, did not work out to well for the Israelites. Maybe from that time on people believed in the divine right of kings, that kings and the ruling elites were the anointed ones. What other justification could there be? But jumping ahead 3,000 years it becomes a huge leap of faith believing somebody like Friedrich Wilhelm Viktor Albert, a Hohenzollern, was divinely authorized to be King of Prussia and Emperor of Germany. Those who believe in the fallibility of a supreme being have a good argument on the process of picking a ruler.
So, Europe at the beginning of the 20th Century finds itself in family way. Here is the first grandchild of Queen Victoria, an heir apparent simply because his mother was the eldest daughter of the Queen — a product of selective breeding. Cambridge Dictionary defines selective breeding as the “process of choosing only plants and animals with desirable characteristics to reproduce.” This may be a good way to improve wheat yields but there has to be better ways picking a leader. When it comes to royal inbreeding it is hard to make this definition stand up. What were the desirable characteristics gleaned from Wilhelm?
The dapper looking aristocrat turned emperor.What makes this generational transfer of power even more absurd is the future Kaiser of Germany, when he was a little tike, was also sixth in line of succession to the British throne. And to throw a massive wrinkle into this divinity belief, the Kaiser was third cousin to Czar Nicholas of Russia, who was also first cousin to George the V of England who was also first cousins to Willy and Nicky. It would be unfair to blame the three cousins for the carnage of World War I but one has to wonder what a Thanksgiving Dinner would have been like with all of them gathered around the festive table of Europe instead of entrenched for four years on a battlefield.
And simply put, there were no way to popularly remove any of these incompetent divinely mandated rulers. There were no midterm elections. It was up to God. Any attempt by a mere mortal to do so was a at least a treasonable offense at worst a major offense against God. In less legalistic eras the poor misguided miscreant attempting to undo God’s work could end up in a quick trip to the Tower, or a deep dungeon on the rack, possibly being drawn and quartered or some other sort of gruesome public execution. Followed by an even quicker condemned trip to hell.
Using a divinely authorized form of picking world leaders can end up badly. I can only imagine God, hand to forehead, saying to himself, “not again.” This played out in the Balkans in June of 1914 when a ticked-off nineteen year-old Bosnian Serbian, Gavrilo Princip, decides to negate a heavenly mandate by killing Archduke Franz Ferdinand. Ferdinand’s death, the Habsburg heir to the the already dying Austrian Hungarian empire, plunged Europe into fours years of trench warfare resulting in more than 20 million dead. The end result for two of the three cousins is they lose everything: Nickolas his life and Wilhelm is forced into exile and disappears to history altogether. The Habsburgs, like the ruling Romanovs in Russia, lose their 500 years of family rule in four years. As ruling elites they placed themselves and their families above the common man and law.
In previous eras of institutional religious mysticism, getting the uneducated to believe that “God” put a certain family in power for generations was an easy sell. Take Papal rule, for example, the Conti Family, and they may have no affiliation with any New York mob, had four members of its family to reign as heir to Saint Peter in Rome. The Medici and the Orisini families each had three popes each to sit on the Vatican throne of the Catholic Church. This was a time before mass communication. A time when heretical thoughts could get person excommunicated at best tortured at worst. The Church controlled social media with various feast days, religious obligations and indulgences. Any person straying from the flock could possibly find themselves in a visit to the Inquisitor General’s office for reeducation.
And woe to those who begged to challenge certain dogmatic beliefs embedded into the conservative core faith and doctrine of the time. Much like today’s scientific evidence about climate change, the Catholic Church stood firmly behind the geocentric model that the Earth is the center of the universe. Scientist like Copernicus and Galileo turned the conservative world upside down, inside out and all around with scientific observations that shifted the Earth from the center of the known world. However, this did not hinder the Church. In 1616 the Catholic Church went full in on the geocentric belief and declared that any yammering about heliocentrism, the Sun being the center of the universe was simply heresy.
Pope Urban VIII says you can talk about Copernicus and the Sun but only in theory.
Unfazed with possibility of torture for espousing heretical nonsense, Galileo published Dialogue Concerning the two Chief World Systems in 1632. Galileo had already been warned once for his heliocentric views back in 1616. Dropping two differently weighted cannon balls from the Leaning Tower of Pisa to see which would land first was one thing, but Earth going around the Sun was a cannon ball gone too far. Besides, nobody likes a loose cannon, a know-it-all . Despite the growing scientific evidence to support his claims, Galileo was convicted of heresy in 1633 and sentenced to life imprisonment. Fortunately, he served his sentence under house arrest dying in 1642.
This sort of heresy still exists today. In 2017, then Governor of Florida, Rick Scott , banned state agencies and contractors from using the terms “global warming” and “climate change.” in state documents. According to The Guardian, “In 2017, he approved Florida’s so-called “anti-science law”, which critics say was aimed at allowing legal challenges to the teaching of the realities of climate change and global warming in the state’s classrooms.” Pope Urban VIII’s logic lives on, in theory.
In Galileo’s case, the conservative efforts could not keep his ideas under house arrest. They could claim that these ideas were heresy but not fake. Today it can be argued that climate change is fake but Florida, with 8,436 miles of coastline, and the highest point being 312 feet above sea level, is subjected to all sorts of tidal changes from storm surges to saltwater intrusion. Banning a phrase is not going to hold back the Atlantic Ocean any more than it will change the positions of the Earth and the Sun.
In 20 or 30 years the Miami Dolphins might be playing in Orlando Map: Climate Kids NASA.gov
The state of conservative ruling elites, and let me be clear I am not just talking about politics and religion or our conceptual beliefs on liberalism or conservatism. The real trend is that conservative ideology tends to hang on more and eventually rolls back liberal principles. In 1792 the French National Convention, a product of the French Revolution, banned the monarchy. In 1793 they executed the king for treason. Twenty-three years later France brings back a new king to the throne. Granted, France was not the same and without a doubt some liberal changes of “liberty, equality, fraternity” stuck.
Today, we are bombarded with legalistic, economic and political mantras. Liberal chants like “free college tuition” or “medicare for all” that get quickly branded as socialism, a condition worse than the plague. But somehow we buy into “money is free speech” or economic concept “to big to fail.” In response to the Great Recession the federal government passed a variety of banking laws to check the greed of various banking interests. Most of those laws have either been repealed or eviscerated. The government gave out more than $400 billion to various banks and corporations to keep them afloat. And yes, most of this money was paid back. But could you imagine if our government would have taken Marie Antoinette’s advice and handed out some of that cake to the middle. Even if they would have distributed a fraction of that money, say one-fourth directly into the hands of the middle it would have proved a favorite conservative mantra of the 1980s that “a rising tide lifts all boats.”
These modern day conservative myth, some validated by the Supreme Court, others beaten into our brains by political pundits and yammering talking heads, are foisted upon us much like the god-driven Medieval monarchical chant of “divine rights of kings” and the Earth is the center of our little corner of the universe seems absurd. Unlike the past, watching the today’s shuttlecock fly over the net from one-side-to-the-other keeps the majority of the people believing that they are in the game. Are they? Or is it still more of a family affair.
Animal intelligence with human overlords.In so many little ways our country has changed in my life time. I often think of my wife’s grandfather who grew up as a Mississippi farm boy in the early 1900’s. He once tried to explain to me the work differences between oxen, horses and mules. I could not help but think of the recent tug-of-war demonstration Elon Musk put on with his new electric Cybertruck and a Ford F-150. Who would have thought 20 years ago that an electric truck could take on the Ford, Chevy and Dodge gas guzzling giants in a tractor pull. I can imagine constructions workers bantering with each other in a bullying way over beers on which pickup truck was better for hauling or towing but I am sure electric trucks never entered the debate. In our information age this would be equivalent of techno geeks pontificating on the qualities and drawbacks between computing capabilities of Notebooks, Macs, Microsoft or any devices with an operating system.
But Paw, as we called him, lived long enough to see the beginning of the computer age. He saw it but never really experienced it. He grew up fighting in the Great War and spent a year in France. Something new for a lot of country boys living in the Roaring 20’s with The Great Gatsby which would soon turn into To Have and Have Not during the Great Depression. If they lived long enough, they saw the world go from prices stamped onto products to scanning bar codes at the grocery store check-out line. They literally went from horse-and-buggy to landing on the Moon and the Space Shuttle.
That generation is all but gone. I am not sure if they had nickname except maybe “old fogies,” a term, which now, could be considered close to a hate crime or in the same category as a gender or racial slur. I am not sure if the newly coined, “okay boomer” is descriptive or derogatory. The debate is on.
We boomers, too, have seen a thing or two and as of late it seems like things are moving a lot faster than plodding team of oxen on a Mississippi dirt road in August. I have seen it go from where a smart man carried a pocket knife with two blades and a can and bottle opener folded in there somewhere. The more sophisticated man’s knife would have a cork screw on it for that bottle of Chardonnay casually consumed on picnic blanket under a shade tree with your best girl. That was a time before pop top cans and twist off bottle caps. Wine always had a cork and did not come in a box. I would not be surprised that in the very near future somebody comes up with some sort of app to open tough tightly lidded or shrink-wrapped products. I mean how many people today even carry pocket knives. But their phone is loaded with apps that can book a flight, pay for the flight, and then get them on the plane.
The Swiss Army Knife: Soldatenmesser 08, Militärsackmesser with multiple mechanical apps.
Who thought life could get better than pop top cans, and twist off Coke bottles? But it does. Just look at our old rotary dial phones with party lines. The first rotary phone came out in 1892 but it was not until 1963 that we went from dialing to push buttons. As Sonny and Cher would sing: and the beat goes on. Those land lines are still around but have been replaced with multiple iterations of wireless smart phones. Gone are long distance operators and rollover minutes.
According to the website SimpleTexting the first smart phone was an IBM Simon Personal Communicator It came out in 1994 and looked like a slim version of a World War II walkie talkie. It could send and receive emails and faxes and “It even featured standard and predictive stylus input screen keyboards.” I have a feeling I should know what that is but don’t. When it comes to this sort technology, even 1994 era stuff, I’m swimming in the shallow end of the techno pond.
The world’s first smart phone IBM’s simple Simon Personal Communicator.
The smart phone, in my opinion is a perfect example of peanut butter and jelly innovation. Before there could be a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, the world needed sliced bread. The basic ingredients for the sandwich were present. Just like there have always been radio waves. It just took technology awhile to catch up. It is the old “what ya gonna do with it” innovation that has made America always great.
Peanut butter was around in the early 1890’s and was actually considered couture and not a food staple of the masses. Bread has been around for centuries. However, it took sliced bread to bring all three ingredients together. In 1928. Otto Rohwedder brought in the new age of sliced bread with the first automatic bread slicing machine. An invention that gave us the modern Deli and maybe even ushered in the concept of fast food.
The late 1920’s Western Electric’s Model 102 B1 hand telephone with E1 handset with no Apps.
It is really is insane to compare the smart phone to a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. Maybe it is more like the clock radio, which came out in the 1940’s. Combine the average alarm clock with a radio and life just gets better. The smart phone, like the clock radio and the sandwich, was out there just waiting to be developed. It just took some innovation to bring them together. For instance, the first iPhone came out in June of 2007. We are now up to 11 models and 5Gs. Phones with cameras and instant communication and apps that do just about everything for us but tie our shoes. People don’t go out of the house without the damned thing plastered to their faces or some sort of ear piece pushed into their ears. States have had to enact laws to curb people from using their smart phones and driving at the same time. A non alcoholic DUI. We love our smart phones. Now the peanut-butter-and-jelly science is leading us to the innovation of a smart car.
The Nokia 3210 , The “noisy cricket” considered by some to be one of the most popular and best phones Nokia made.
I do not think my first mobile phone had any Gs. It was a little analogue device that my wife called a noisy cricket. A neat feature was the various animal sounds you could choose for ring tones. I liked the Dolphin. The little thing was about the size of the hand phaser that Captain Kirk zapped Klingons with in Star Trek. It did everything my landline did without a wire but with text messaging and a voice mailbox. Texting gave me the opportunity to communicate with people and not have to actually talk to them and the voice mail box meant I didn’t have to answer the phone at all. One drawback though, was the noisy cricket had no emojis. It is hard to imagine a time without emojis. Who could live in world devoid of such creatures. It hearkens back to the dark ages when a P & J sandwich was waiting to come between two pieces of Wonder Bread.
Sliced bread. It brought peanut butter and jelly together.
But life does get even better than sliced bread. Today’s technology allows us to call anybody within radius of a cell tower and a satellite link. And if that is not enough we can now talk to people face-to-face. But what is really great, is we can talk to the phone itself. I cannot count the times I have screamed at some dumb insubordinate machine thinking that my tirade would bring it into some sort of compliance with my wishes. Now the phone is like Aladdin in a lamp. It is science and Arabian fantasy brought together—another peanut butter and jelly moment! It is almost like having your very own Genie. I think it would be neat, though, that when you summon Suri or some other so-called artificially intelligent speaking machine that they answer with, “Yes. Master. Your wish is my command.” The reason I say this is I just do not trust machines to comply with my wishes.
I first ran into this at an early age. My dad always thought I was lazy because I could never get any of his lawn mowers to start. Yes, my motivation to get one started was low but I really think I was meant to live in the age of the hammer and sickle, the era of real bricks and mortar. In a time when they actually stacked one brick on-top-of-two. A time when the goat took care of the lawn. A time before bricks and mortar was not meant to differentiate between a store front business and an online business.
As an “Okay, Boomer” I grew up reading dystopian novels like Alex Huxley’s Brave New World, Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 and George Orwell’s 1984. “Big Brother is watching.” My luck with dumb machines and a my dystopian view of them has created a deep distrust of machines that goes beyond any sort belief in the deep state. It concerns me that a machine with artificial intelligence can out-think me. It raises some real concerns because it really does not require much effort to out-think me. I have never fired on all synapses and now machines that can process information faster than me is the norm. And I am not just talking about playing computer chess.
The face of Hal.
I am not sure where things are going. Because what boomer can forget the recalcitrant, malfunctioning artificial intelligent computer HAL 9000 in the Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke movie 2001: A Space Odyssey. When commanded by a space-walking astronaut to “open the pod bay doors” to let him back into the space ship, HAL responds with a cool mechanical voice: “Sorry Dave I cannot do that.” What the heck do you mean you cannot do that? HAL was going to leave Dave’s human butt out in deep space because he, HAL, had a better grip on what was going on with their mission. And I use the word their because at what point will we start cohabiting the planet with smarter-than-human machines?
It goes beyond traffic lights telling us when we can go and when we should stop. Machines that have a better so-called understanding of what is going on are taking the peanut butter and jelly sandwich innovation and putting it in the realm of cognitive mental mischief. We may be setting ourselves up to a real dystopian moment. To paraphrase the classic Blues song: It ain’t no fun when the Robot’s got the gun.”
As the nation gears up from an impeachment inquiry to an full blown on House investigation we have to wonder if is something about November that instigates radical political changes. It must be something in the fall air, the Earth’s rotation or the tilt. The changing of the temperatures, in the Northern Hemisphere not only has the leaves turning colors and falling to the ground but people turning red and blue. Maybe it could be just knowing that winter is getting ready to roll in and people, animals and plants know whatever has to get done needs to get done before the cold weather sets in.
Here in the United States, our national elections are a biennial event. Much like plants that come to foliage one year, drops their seeds the next and then flower; so it is with our presidential elections. We experience a two year campaign season that works its way into a frenzy during the dog days of summer with conventions and then culminates into the parties turning the their mad dogs loose onto the electorate. Despite the elections being every two-to-four years, campaign season is now a continual growing season. Even plants need a break and go dormant. But impeachment is like the 50 year drought, or the sudden warm snap that could even lull Punxsutawney Phil out for a day on the town.
Since the framers of the Constitution lived in an agrarian society, maybe they planned for a fall pre-winter election and post-winter inaugurations with a dormant period to let the season do its thing. A sort of governmental sowing of seeds. A time to cage hostile feelings or create a season of contemplative planning to decide what to plant in the upcoming political season. Despite putting impeachment into the Constitution, I am sure it was not meant to be used for Presidential pruning. A nation, however, like the farmer reaps what it sows and we really planted a hybrid.
However, whatever gets planted, the fabric of our representative democracy is intertwined in such a way that a November election is not too far off to initiate the change needed to rectify injustices. For instance, in the 1960s it was Civil Rights laws that brought people to march and demonstrate for full equality. Congress enacted the Civil Rights Act. It was the Vietnam War that brought about the belief if you are young enough to fight for your country you should have the right to vote. Hence, the 26h Amendment lowering the voting age to 18 years. Our outlet for resolving these issues is our biennial elections. But what happens when these elections gives a bad yield?
As the longest running representative democracy, these seasonal elections have served us well to relieve and begin the process of implementing solutions to pressing public problems. Democracy, unlike other forms of government takes a little more time and work to get things done. And, in the view of many, it never gets it right. But it gets it close enough to right so that we do not end up out in the streets in mob rule. We usually get a workable balance between populism, reform and regulation.The two-year election cycle gives us time to sort things out, plant a few seeds and see what sprouts. Lately, though we are lucky if we get a crop in the field.
I would hardly say that today’s fall-season elected officials are like plants. This might be insulting to most plants or the common weed in your backyard. Although, some politicians are well established dandy lions that seem to proliferate in all seasons–even the 50 year drought. But there are some similarities. Plants need rich soil to thrive. Politicians need some rich backers with deep pockets; a few, however, can actually self-fertilize–just look to the previous eight years of Florida’s governor’s office. Florida is a place were just about any invasive can thrive all year long. Some plants prefer sunlight and others shade. Politicians are similar in that some bask in the bright lights of the media enjoying their time behind the podium while others prefer to move about in the shaded areas of public service doing their deeds behind closed doors.
But before we lose that rustic fall scenery and the trees become bare, the clocks get turned back and the skies turn a darker shade of gray, issues come forward and events occur that it some, cases cannot wait for the winter thaw. In America, we are not immune to governmental up-evil. Like most countries around the globe, we have endured our share of struggles, social injustices that have resulted in civil disobedience. and in some cases just plain flat-out widespread rioting; we have endured various economic and natural catastrophes, as well as terrorist attacks and even a full blown Civil War. But in most cases we believe in the power of the ballot over the bullet. Hence, an impeachment clause to the Constitution.
But November in other parts of the world may not experience the growing and nurturing effects of biennial governmental gardening that our elections provide and instead find far more fiery ways to curb their enthusiasm. There is always somebody who wants to take a short cut. They end up taking an ax to the tree trunk; or maybe they are just an overzealous gardener madly hacking away at whatever looks like a weed; or they start a scorched earth policy of burning the entire field and end up eradicate everything like a bunch of Bolsheviks.
Stalin and Lenin: The original Red Scare Duo.*
For example, it was November 7, 1917 when Bolsheviks took to the streets in what would eventually turn into a scorched earth policy. It was earlier in the year, however, that the Imperial St. Petersburg army garrison abandoned their posts and joined striking workers that exposed Russia to radical change. Workers who wanted “socialist reforms” forced Czar Nicholas II to abdicate. The Bolsheviks seized the moment. In November they overthrew Alexander Kerensky’s Provisional Government. Lead by Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, better known in the West by the notorious one-name moniker: Lenin, they set up The Council of People’s Commissars.
Unfortunately the seeds of democracy never took. Alexander Kerensky would bolt to the West and remain in exile for the rest of his life. Sadly, the Bolsheviks were less forgiving when it came to the current Romanov’s. In less than a year after toppling the Provisional Government, in what could be described mildly as the culmination of centuries of Romanov exploitation, a manifesto of peasant dissatisfaction with the extravagant, and sometime maniacal, monarchical rule ended with the execution of Nicholas and his entire family. Thus bringing forth the Soviet Union and a radical form of socialism and an economic system we know as communism.
Mussolini and Hitler; Fascist fanatics.
Another November to remember occurred six years later almost to the day that the Bolsheviks took power, Adolf Hitler and his burgeoning fascist movement took to the Bavarian streets in a failed coup. Inspired by Benito Mussolini’s National Fascist Party March on Rome in late October of 1922. A march that toppled the teetering Italian Kingdom and brought Mussolini and his Brown Shirts into power. An energized Hitler, encouraged with his fellow fascist’s success, decided he could overthrow the Bavarian government in what came to be called the Beer Hall Putsch. Hitler and his Nazi cohorts stormed the Buergerbraukeller where Bavarian leaders were meeting, in an attempt to kidnap them, while other Nazis tried to capture key governmental offices.
The two-day Putsch failed in gunfire. Sixteen Nazis and four policemen were killed. Hitler managed to slink off, hiding in a friend’s attic. He was arrested three days later. Hitler was charged with high treason, and was found guilty and sentenced to five years in prison but only served eight months.
Hitler and fellow Nazis return to their failed Putsch in 1934*
Hitler’s form of Fascism would eventually come to power in 1933 eradicating those who did not see the goals of his thousand year Third Reich, a sort of make Germany better again movement. This unchecked fanaticism would bring war to Europe and start World War II killing millions and leaving Europe in ruin. To avoid any consequences for his fascist fanaticism Hitler would commit suicide.
Other monumental November changes happened, in 1519 when Hernan Cortes captured the Aztec capital and Emperor Montezuma ending one of the “New World’s” established civilizations. And in a November closer to our times, a military coup killed South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem. The assassination of Diem and his brother signaled a deeper United States military involvement in South Viet Nam that would officially end with the fall of Saigon in 1975. It would take several biennial elections, demonstrations and four students killed at Kent state to bring about a political end to this unpopular war.
Franklin knew keeping a Republic would not be easy.
Our election cycle was created by men who wanted to “secure the Blessings of Liberty” for posterity. After leaving Independence Hall where the Constitutional Convention met in Philadelphia to write a new Constitution, a Constitution that bound us together in a firm Republic, to replace the go it alone attitude of the Articles of Confederation; Ben Franklin was asked, “Well, Doctor, what have we got–a Republic or a Monarchy?” To which Franklin replied, “A Republic, if you can keep it.” The key to keeping a Republic is remembering what it stands for. In the closing paragraph of the Declaration of Independence the signers stated their support for independence by putting a “firm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence” and that “wemutually pledge to each other our Lives and Fortunes and our sacred Honor. ”
Our November elections can be a messy time because democracy is messy. But it is a time when we pledge to each other our mutual support because it sure beats Conquistadors riding into town searching for gold. It is better than Bolsheviks imposing a collective social order. And it is better than Nazis forcing their way into government like mobsters.
Elections might not settle every issue at any given time but if we are guided with the concepts in the Preamble of our Constitution with the belief that we can continually “form a more perfect Union” and not a create chaos out of division , we will be able to keep our Republic. It is unfortunate but maybe necessary at times that we need to review an election. Say what you will about impeachment but the Constitution does give Congress a backdoor to tend to democracy’s garden.
*This photos have been edited by the powers to be at the time either cropping individuals out or simply removing them.
In all this yammering about impeachment lately certain things become obvious yet misinterpreted. Forget about the simple truth–that slithered out the room a long time ago. There does seem to be some “truth” to the statement recently made that we don’t believe in the truth but in facts. I would think that facts build to the truth but I guess it all depends on how you stack them: end-to-end, one- on-top-of-the-other or sideways. And if we really want to get iffy maybe take the facts off into another dimension and alternate universes and reality altogether.
Take Adam and Eve for instance. God dropped them into the Garden of Eden and gave them carte blanche. He gave them run of the place with one rule: Don’t eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil “for when you do you will surely die.” I honestly feel that God was the first Libertarian. The Institute for Humane Studies at George Mason University says that a classic libertarian’s “perspective is that (of) peace, prosperity and social harmony.” Libertarians “are fostered by ‘as much liberty as possible’ and ‘as little government as necessary’.” It sounds like paradise: no government, basically no rules to follow and no taxes to pay. But you know somewhere somehow it was going to get screwed up and Adam and Eve set the standard. The old saying if it is too good to be true…
Man, despite God’s good graces, has made things much more complicated through the millennia’s endless rules and regulations. A large portion of the world’s population once believed that you could go to hell by eating meat on Friday. God created a couple of innocents to roam freely in Eden. But once God created man his creation sort of went off the rails or maybe it was when he created the serpent. According to the Bible it took just three chapters starting from “in the beginning” and basically one chapter in the Book of Genesis for Adam and Eve to meet up with the serpent and see their lives completely transformed. After that meeting with the serpent, there was no way to make the Garden of Eden great again.
History, however, is full of crafty, sinister, and evil individuals who can mesmerize the masses with their malevolence. It may have started in the Garden with the beguilement of Adam and Eve. However, it did not stop there. The art of the deal gave us great concepts like the Pharaohs were Gods. When that one did not float anymore somebody came up with the “Divine Right of Kings.”
We have seen outright brutal dictators like Hitler at his Nuremberg Nazi rallies. We have seen Stalin and his mass purges that sent millions off to Siberia never to be seen or heard from again.
Napoleon’e triumphant return from his Elba exile. Making France great again.The French zealously followed Napoleon off on European conquest and domination that scorched Europe for decades. The word chauvinist comes from a faithful soldier, Nicholas Chauvin, in Napoleon’s Grand Armee and his undying devotion and patriotism to the “Little Corporal.” And we have seen the less sinister swindlers and con artists like Bernie Madoff, Charles Ponzi and Victor Lustig. Lustig once sold the Eiffel Tower–twice! And even managed to con Al Capone out of $50,000. Talk about bravado and playing to somebody’s fantasies and getting away with it. It sort of reminds you of being able to stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shooting people and not losing votes. Even Al Capone could not get away with that.
So where did these reptilian people come from? In Genesis we are told that “the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made.” Now the Bible does not give us an actual timeline on how long Adam and Eve were in Eden before they met with the serpent. It seems like one day God was taking a rib from Adam and the next thing you know he and Eve are having breakfast with the serpent.
But after their meeting with the snake, things changed for the worse. Often in life, we meet that one person or thing that can inspire the worst in us. For Adam and Eve it was the serpent telling them the tree in the middle of the garden has great fruit, the very best. “Don’t worry about God. I have a great relationship with God. We get along great and he is doing great things with Eden. God is somebody I can deal with. Besides, He is a great guy.”
“Better to shun the bait than struggle in the snare.” ― William Blake
Christians may call it original sin but I really think it was the original beguilement. When God created the world, and let us put aside for a moment the old argument of Creationism v Evolution, and assume that God put Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. We can all agree it would have been a great place to raise your kids, a sort of nirvana neighborhood. However, the pair got played. After catching the serpent’s art of the deal they went right over the fence with the “No Trespassing” sign on it. The sad part is Adam and Eve knew they had been conned. Probably the same way Al Capone felt when he was fleeced for 50 Gees, just like the voters in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania who never had any real ring time with a fast con developer who may now be suffering from buyers remorse.
And how did Adam and Eve know they crossed that line? The found themselves hiding naked in the bushes mending fig leaves together. It would be safe to say that most of us have been found in similar situations only with our clothes on: Caught red-handed at the proverbial cookie jar. Most of us know not to take the boss’s parking spot; don’t eat somebody’s lunch left in the refrigerator. Yet there is always one of us who for whatever reason does not get it. Or maybe, like the snake, they just don’t care. From that time on I think all of mankind has been the subject of being beguiled by slippery ideas and catchy phrases
Today we can catch somebody “red handed,” on tape, live on camera saying exactly what they did. God did not need all the technical gadgets used today to catch a thief. He could see for himself that Adam and Eve were in their new fig leaf attire. This was not red-handed. More like bare-assed naked.
The pair did not have cock-n-bull story. Being innocents they had no idea how to lie their way out the situation. That would be an art learned and honed through time. And although buses were not around yet, Adam threw Eve right under the apple cart saying she gave him the apple, In turn, Eve pointed the finger at the snake. No loyalty here as we witness crap going down hill by the bucketful. You have to give the pair credit they did not cry and moan or seek legal advice because there was none to be had. (A fixer would have to come much later.) They took their eviction on the chin.
However, God went from being a libertarian to puritanical vengeful God as in Jonathan Edwards “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.” Adam and Eve lost their interest-free credit card. It was strictly cash. They were now being held “over the pit of hell, much as one holds a spider, or some loathsome insect over the fire.”
In our modern day thinking we are quick to blame the victims and Adam and Eve are not exempt. How can two people be fooled by a talking snake saying that if they ate from this tree things would be great, they would be perfect. The serpent was able to play on the their vanity and a belief that somehow they were being left behind. It is not too hard to imagine somebody getting away with selling the Brooklyn Bridge or the Eiffel Tower. After all, the world is full of people trying to sell something bigger and better that glitters in gold.
I play to people’s fantasies. People may not always think big themselves, but they can still get very excited by those who do. That’s why a little hyperbole never hurts. People want to believe that something is the biggest and the greatest and the most spectacular. I call it truthful hyperbole. It’s an innocent form of exaggeration, and a very effective form of promotion.”
As for the snake, he did not fare much better than our pair of innocents. Think about it. What crime did the serpent commit? What are the facts? If you think about it, the snake did not even eat the so-called apple, no proof at all. This could have been the first witch hunt or rattlesnake roundup. I can see the snake now saying the conversation he had with Adam and Eve about the tree of knowledge was perfect, He may have even suggested there was no sort of quid pro quo. Maybe he complained that God was not on the up and up with the tree in the middle of the garden. He just suggested that if the pair ate from the tree of knowledge the Garden of Eden would be great. He possibly could turn heavenly opinion around. He could have told God . “Hey God I am really a great guy, very intelligent, brilliant. I have one of the best brains around. It is not my fault Aimless Adam and Eyesore Eve are two not so bright people, ugly people who also are very stupid. There was no real collusion here because they are not very smart. Besides, they’re no angels.”
All of this brings us back to the facts. Some say facts are the truth. Maya Angelou said, “There is a world of difference between the truth and facts. Facts can obscure the truth.” This leads us to Mark Twain and what he said that fits today’s world of so-called fake news: “Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.” Or it is your lie you can tell it anyway you want.
The Bible does not record what the talking snake said to God , if anything, after the tree incident. And for sure God would not buying anything the serpent was selling. He condemned the the snake to a life of crawling on his belly and eating dust for the rest of his days.
.jpg:// "Trikosko, Marion S., photographer / Public domain")
![](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Henry_II_Plantagenet.jpg:// "Featured in the "Henry Plantagenet" book [Public domain]")
,_The_Bostonians_Paying_the_Excise-man,_or_Tarring_and_Feathering_(1774).jpg:// "Philip Dawe / Public domain")
.jpeg:// "Wilhelm Hester [Public domain]")
mystoryorhistory 