Sunday, March 13, 2016

Is it authoritarianism or nationalism (two of the interpretations of the Trump phenomenon) or both and more?

  1. Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have: independence or respect for elders?
  2. Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have: obedience or self-reliance?
  3. Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have: to be considerate or to be well-behaved?
  4. Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have: curiosity or good manners?
Summarized then, which of the following pairs in more important for a child to have:
  • independence or respect for elders
  • obedience or self-reliance
  • considerate or well-behaved
  • curiosity or good manners
(My answers: independence, self-reliance, considerate, curiosity). They all require courage, and courage makes all other values feasible.....Who said this first?)

These four questions, formulated in 1990 by Stanley Feldman  of  SUNY in Stoneybrook New York, are at the centre of a new book, (actually a PhD thesis)  describing the rise of authoritarianism in America, as practiced by Donald Trump in the current campaign for the Republican nomination for the presidency of the United States.
Last September, a PhD student at the University of Massachusetts Amherst named Matthew MacWilliams realized that his dissertation research might hold the answer to not just one but all three of these mysteries.
MacWilliams studies authoritarianism — not actual dictators, but rather a psychological profile of individual voters that is characterized by a desire for order and a fear of outsiders. People who score high in authoritarianism, when they feel threatened, look for strong leaders who promise to take whatever action necessary to protect them from outsiders and prevent the changes they fear.
So MacWilliams naturally wondered if authoritarianism might correlate with support for Trump.
He polled a large sample of likely voters, looking for correlations between support for Trump and views that align with authoritarianism. What he found was astonishing: Not only did authoritarianism correlate, but it seemed to predict support for Trump more reliably than virtually any other indicator. He later repeated the same poll in South Carolina, shortly before the primary there, and found the same results.
As it turns out, MacWilliams wasn't the only one to have this realization. Miles away, in an office at Vanderbilt University, a professor named Marc Hetherington was having his own aha moment. He realized that he and a fellow political scientist, the University of North Carolina's Jonathan Weiler, had essentially predicted Trump's rise back in 2009, when they discovered something that would turn out to be far more significant than they then realized.
That year, Hetherington and Weiler published a book about the effects of authoritarianism on American politics. Through a series of experiments and careful data analysis, they had come to a surprising conclusion: Much of the polarization dividing American politics was fueled not just by gerrymandering or money in politics or the other oft-cited variables, but by an unnoticed but surprisingly large electoral group — authoritarians.
Their book concluded that the GOP, by positioning itself as the party of traditional values and law and order, had unknowingly attracted what would turn out to be a vast and previously bipartisan population of Americans with authoritarian tendencies.
( By Amanda Taub on March 1, 2016, The Rise of American Authoritarianism, from VOX website)
How might it be that questions about parenting would apply to a presidential campaign, a political party and a prediction about the future of the Republican Party?
And, as it happened, Jonathan Weiler was a guest on GPS with Fareed Zakaria this morning, during which interview he explained that the pursuit of "order" is central to those espousing authoritarianism. And the world view that places order at the top of the "value" list can be found in many places, including the family, the classroom, the board room, the church, and the political campaigns and political parties. Those who answer the four questions similarly, indicating their high espousal of order, cross all the normal demographic lines. So, as Weiler points out, the media argument that blue collar whites are the only or the predominate segment of the American society who support Trump simply does not hold.
In fact, according to Weiler, well-educated suburban-dwelling professionals also demonstrate this trait of putting order at the top of their value totem pole. Weiler further explains that the Republican party, having fostered and encouraged the culture in which order is dominant in the value hit parade, is likely to find successors to Trump, a line of people aspiring to leadership in their party that depends on the value of pursuing order, at all costs.
  • As one who proudly tells the story of having been quite literally yelled at by a teacher colleague for being too liberal (after disagreeing with him about whether or not a student in my class and his had actually cheated in his math test; she had not cheated) and
  • one who has been rejected by a human resources consulting company out of the Ottawa Valley (exclusively dependent on wacky personality inventory tests from WACO Texas) because, having answered the questions in the quiz honestly, I was considered "too difficult to manage" and
  • one who has been literally screamed at by an Episcopal Bishop for have the gall to suggest that men needed to learn about and to express their emotions "(No, that is way too dangerous!" was the screamed phrase) and
  • one who was 'given the strap' in grade four by a controlling anal female teacher for a friendly "Hi Roge'"  poke on the shoulder of a friend as he passed my desk immediately after the lunch break
  • one who was told by his mother to shut up when attempting to discuss the differences between her father (an authoritarian conservative) and my father (a collaborative liberal) and
  • one who challenged another bishop attempting to close a grieving process in a parish where a significant and traumatic tragedy had ripped the parish apart, and who championed the work of the "Churchill like" wardens for sending weeping parishioners home up to six months following the event, "Respectfully, Bishop, I commend your presence here with these grieving people, but Winston Churchill would have made a lousy grief-counsellor!" and
  • one who told a former high school principal/supervisor, that he had betrayed my confidence several years earlier, and then slammed the door of my vehicle in his face, when he uttered, "That never happened!" and
  • one who submitted a letter of resignation at the last date of a probationary period when working for a music festival, because the hiring committee was quite obviously dishonest and lacking integrity and
  • one who fumed when beaten by a mother who completely avoided responsibility for her abusive behaviour, wrote to my aunts about the abuse at thirteen, and then was punished for "deceit" in sending the letter
I have had my share of experiencing the abuse of authority....and its unadulterated pursuit by those who "know better" than all of the rest of us, ranks, in my value list, as one of the most serious dangers we face among those of us who share the planet.
While the Canadian constitution stresses the pursuit of "peace, order and good government," and generally those goals are valid, it is in the interactions between people that the pursuit of "order" will too frequently obliterate the other.
The state's pursuit of order is not the same dynamic as the interactions between individuals, in character, in dimension or in importance. However, those human exchanges cannot and must not be ignored given their permissibility as the rise of authoritarianism explodes onto the political map.
For example:
..........A teacher seeking to maintain order in her classroom following the tragic death of the ten-year-old brother of one of her seven-year-old students, tells her student, three weeks after the witnessed and accidental death of the elder brother, "The honeymoon is over" because he is not completing his seat work or his homework.
.........A clergy in a church tells his congregation, "All Catholics are going to Hell" as if he is speaking the will of God
........A company that tells its employees that they can accept the intolerable and unsafe conditions of the work or leave, because there are thousands waiting in line to take his place
.......A company like Wal-Mart tells it employees that if they vote to strike the company will simply close the store and they will all be left without jobs
......A presidential candidate who tells his audience to "beat the guy" because 'the guy' is peacefully protesting the candidate's abuse of authority
......A investigating officer who has his/her mind made up before even investigating a crime scene
.....A public figure who espouses racial bigotry as a central component of his world view....
And the list is, in a word, interminable.....
Every time anyone consciously or unconsciously reduces the value, the humanity, the worth of another human being, that person abuses his authority and demeans the other.
Governments who betray the privacy of their constituents, for example abuse their authority.
Police who shoot their unarmed youths, abuse their authority.
And judicial systems that ignore, lose, or defame evidence abuse their authority.

The management of authority at the human level is a skill almost never really taught. It is subsumed into a program on leadership, or the clinical criteria for effective management. And while most curricula would not overtly promote the abuse of authority, there are a plethora of ways to cover such abuse through secrecy, through threats, through oaths of silence, through bribes, through cover-up stories, and through out-right denials.
When asked if he shares ANY responsibility for the recent spate of physical attacks at his rallies, Trump claimed responsibility only for having cancelled the planned rally in Chicago, after the authorities warned of impending conflict (a fact disputed by a reputable reporter), and thereby offending thousands of his loyal supporters.
We are, in short, in danger of being swept up by a band of marauding "mobsters" whose pursuit of what they deem "order" is their ultimate supremacy, whether it is whites over blacks, or Christians over Muslims, or Americans over Mexicans, or "good people" (Trump cheer-leaders) over "bad people" (all those who protest at Trump rallies). Their unobstructed, unprotested and unmolested pursuit of their goal, to have Trump living in the White House is so ironic, especially when we all know just how determined to be unpredictable, and thereby uncontrolled, and thereby dominant, and threatening to any who happen to attract his ire. It is not order that the Trump victory is or will deliver. It is rather complete disorder, chaos and everything that the ISIS terrorists would or could dream in their wildest fantast.
Trump is already a recruiting machine for ISIS.
Trump is already a threat to the peace, order and security of the United States, simply by playing his ruthless game of self-promotion, having seduced millions of people to sign on to his dangerous "pledge" to commit to vote for him in their respective primaries.
There is reason, however, to suggest that the "authoritarianism" thesis is too simplistic, reductionistic, and thereby unreliable. For example, in the complex world of political theory, and political science, there are themes like "nationalism" that are also being ascribed to the Trump phenomenon.
Four guests on GPS, representing a variety of European perspectives, all saw in Trump evidence of an enhanced view of nationalism, racism, and a kind of right-wing withdrawal from the world. For example, the leader of the right in France has already tweeted a vote for Trump. An Italian reporter says that in that country, Trump's name is being linked daily with that of former Italian leader, Berlusconi, in his business background, and in his vulgar campaign rhetoric.
Decades hence, libraries will be filled with theses that attempt to parse the Trump phenomenom...
We can and do only hope that the skirmishes now occurring in his rallies do not escalate into full-blown violence, from which neither  the candidate nor his campaign can or will escape culpability.



Wednesday, March 9, 2016

American political campaign: dance of the unconscious Shadows of Trump, his acolytes and enemies


Never before have we had so much information in bits and pieces flooded upon us by radio and television and satellite, yet never before have we had so little inner certainty about our own being. The more objective truth increases, the more our inner certitude decreases. Our fantastically increased technical power, and each forward step in technology is experience by many as a new push toward our possible annihilation. Nietsche was strangely prophetic when he said:

We live in a period of atomic chaos...the terrible apparition..the Nation State.. and the hunt for happiness will never be greater than when it must be caught between today adn tomorrow; because the day after tomorrow all hunting time may have come to an end altogether.

Sensing this and despairing of ever finding meaning in life, people these days seize on the many ways of dulling their awareness by apathy, by psychic numbing, or be hedonism. (Rollo May: The Discovery of Being:Writings in Existential Psychology)

And to May’s penetrating insight we might add, that in our vacuum of inner certitude, we project our fears directly onto a “saviour” whom we falsely believe will relieve us of our emptiness. This presidential campaign is far more about the emptiness inside millions of voters than it is about The Donald. However, it is the Donald who is the target of our projections, unconscious though they are, and in this mass unconscious projection, the American electorate is entering a phase of dangerous tragedy, whether or not that tragedy takes the form of a fifty-foot wall, or a nuclear explosion, or even a world economic meltdown worse even than the 2008-9 implosion.

The real tragedy that could come out of the nomination, and thereby potential election of The Donald is that those projections cannot and will not be fulfilled. The American Dream, that prophetic myth that has sustained the country for well over two centuries has never had to integrate the internet, the billions in propaganda spending, the loss of “pride” and purpose among the ordinary American people, and the opportunism, ego and narcissism of one like The Donald. Unconscious projections place untenable and unbearable expectations on the object of those projections. Whether the target is considered the most heroic, or the most evil (and Trump is being targeted with both varieties of projection, it is the unnamed, and unacknowledged and precipitous projections that ultimately fail everyone.

Extrinsic portrayals of the vulgar language Trump uses on the stump, the depth and the venality of the campaign to undermine him, his own complicity in this epic and transnational dance of deaf and dumb psyches (that of the electorate and that of Trump himself) and the profit-driven motive of the complicit and opportunistic media, political handlers, pundits...all of these factors enmeshed in the over-arching time-table of the election campaign itself...and they all rush in to generate a confluence of influences over which no single actor or agent has control. There is no possible outcome from this dance of the phantoms (the Shadows of the candidate and the Shadow of the culture) for the simple yet explosive reason that reality, both the objective and the subjective realities of the universe resulting from this monumental collision of Shadows and the emerging explosion of psychic atoms, neutrons and positive and negative ions. From this collision, only multiple mirages can play out: more and more exclamations of power, success, inevitability and megalomaniacal power over (without a hint of specific proposals except the kind of Cecil B. De Mille fifty-foot walls (characteristic of his epic biblical films) that pour like a cataract from his bottomless narsissictic (yet hollow and empty) ego and the increasingly intense cry of his supporters that he is the only one who can save the country. His growing cadre of opponents also play their part in this Greek tragedy: projecting their existential fears for the survival of one or more of a) The Republican Party, b) the United States itself, c) the global economy, or d) the collapse of the planet’s ecosystem or e) the first nuclear war.

Unfortunately, it is not feasible to speak or white about this drama without warning of the exaggerated expectations of both parties to the dance. It is also not possible to speak or write about such a dance of ‘shades’ or Shadows, without sounding moralistic, somewhat arrogant and certainly somewhat pretentious.

However, the need for the ‘writer’s apology/defence pales beside the profound empathy the writer feels for both partners in this cosmic dance, because it epitomizes the kind of dance of the Shadows that besets domestic, professional, legal, parliamentary and yes, diplomatic conflicts everywhere. At the centre of both partners is an excess of hubris, linked to anger, boiled in a cauldron of alienation and contempt, and nurtured by a rejection of the specialist, intellectual, technological and bureaucratic culture that has risen over the last half century or more. And, of course, when there is this quantum of the disease of anger, hate and revenge, much of it will be and is misdirected. Unfortunately, different from the human experience of grief, loss and the process of dealing with a profound loss like a death, or a divorce, this dance does not exhibit or evoke honour, empathy, compassion or sensitivity.

The only human response to such an impending falling off the cliff is sadness and a whisper of a warning. The political response could conceivably include an awakening by the political professional class that the unconscious does indeed play an integral part in the working out of the public agenda. The face that the unconscious, both individual and collective, has been expelled from the halls of academia, for the express reason that it is not empirical, not measureable, not repeatable and not testable by all of the known tasting instruments (cognitive, chemical, physical, ethical, sociological) known to human culture.

Yet if America itself, and through her example and experience, sad and potentially tragic as that may be, can embrace without fear or shame the twin-headed creature of the objective/subjective aspects of reality, both personal and human, as well as external. It was Rollo May, himself, who told us that the single most penetrating problem of being human is that, at one and the same time, we are both subjective (subjects) and objective (objects). It was Melody Beattie who posed the concept of the march of archetypes through human lives, as portrayed in novels and movies, from the innocent, to the orphan, the victim, the warrior, the wanderer and finally the magician. And any movement out of one archetype and into another requires a transition period, or a time as ‘wanderer’....

Clearly, the United States is wandering in the wilderness of one of the most monumental transitions from one kind of political and historical period, to another of a very different kind. This transitional stage, the letting loose of the Shadows of both a candidate and the electorate, if it is to serve the purpose of aiding and sustaining a kind of political, cultural, and historical development, will need the best informed, the most courageous and the most prophetic and poetic imaginations to steer the ship of states through the shoals and the rocks lying in wait to imperil the little vessel. And since the voyage has already begun, and the projected voyage has not been yet committed to either hard copy or digital screen, this cruise could end up like a voyage to and from Hell, as were those cruise trips for so many affluent tourists have described following the collapse of their ship’s many systems.

The political culture is no country is comfortable delving into the beyond of the individual or the collective unconscious. And what could potentially emerge from this emergent collision of the tectonic plates of a leader’s unsconscious and that of his new-found political acolytes. Neither the individual aspirant nor the electorate is open to this portrayal of the drama in which they are both engaged, even imperiled. Nevertheless, this enmeshment cannot and will not be ended without a further act of desperation by both sides, including especially the portion of the electorate who simply detests The Donald.

It has been a long time, if not perhaps even centuries, since such an epic dance of the polarized and radio-active unconscious of such high-wire actors has played out. Certainly it has not happened in the digital age, embracing the eyes, ears and the imaginations of people around the world.

And, let us not forget that in his prophetic voice, Winston Churchill warned the world, “America always does the right thing, after it has does everything else!”

Tuesday, March 8, 2016

CRA* grants amnesty to tax dodgers, clients of KPMG...just another story about RICH POWER!!


We know that Canada is not the United States. Income inequality is less noticeable and therefore less newsworthy in Canada than in the U.S. And, although Canada pays inordinate attention to the findings of the Auditor General, as it “cares” about how the government spends its tax dollars.

Nevertheless, some of the same dynamics that are so graphically grabbing headlines in the U.S. play a role north of the 49th parallel.

Today, CBC reveals, through evidence handed to it in a “brown envelope” that the international accounting firm KPMG has been providing its most affluent clients a tax haven on the Isle of Man, thereby enabling those rich clients to evade paying tax on those sheltered dollars. And while Canada Revenue Agency will not say whether they will charge KPMG for concocting and executing the scheme, they do indicate that those clients, whose names they obtained through a court order, are being offered “amnesty” to “come in from the cold, and pay taxes on those previously sheltered funds. If they agree to pay back taxes, the story goes, they will not be charged. Some of the offending KPMG clients have agreed while others refused to come forward.

Predictably, lawyers for ordinary Canadians in conflict with CRA are more than a little disappointed that their clients are left without similar favourable treatment, while the rich are offered clemency. On the other hand, lawyers who work for high-end clients tell CBC that those clients can afford to pay for the ‘best legal advice available’ arguing that for CRA to take them on would be both costly and somewhat suspect.

And therein lies the rub: on the one hand, there is one approach for the rich, and quite another for the less affluent.

And while most will sigh and bemoan the “way the world works” borrowing the words of the Charles Schwab television commercial, when the young man asks whether his mentor gets his money back if he is not satisfied and hears with a smirk and a shrug, “No, that’s not the way the world works!” The inference, from Schwab’s perspective is that more questions might make the world work more advantageously for the client of their financial management firm.

And although the story merits coverage, potentially as a “CBC exclusive”, and will get some coverage in the financial pages of the dailies, there will be no public outcry, given Canadian deference to the wealthy and also Canadian deference to the government, unless and until there is a wave of protest to which they can add their voice. It is the slow, and almost imperceptible movement of public attitudes, in this case, toward amnesty for the rich with impunity, that eventually ensnares us all in its entangling web. This kind of evolution does not bring people to the barricades with their shotguns; this kind of story evokes barely a whimper from the public consciousness, and even less from the public conscience; and the people in charge of the CRA, whether they owe obedience and their jobs to a Liberal or a Conservative government, know that their political masters want above all else for them to take all measures available to avoid a public controversy. And the public, by and large, complies, especially in “nice” Canada.

Would this story play differently should a NDP government have been elected on October 19? Who knows?

Nevertheless, the public’s detachment, disillusionment, and even insouciance contributes to the margins of tolerable options available to the government, and thereby to the CRA. Does the public care if the rich are granted amnesty? Does the public wish that if amnesty is available to those who can and will purchase the legal services of the most professional and also most costly legal teams, it must also be available to ordinary Canadians? Does the public seek to put pressure on the current government, as overseers of the CRA, to bring both KPMG and their clients to “heel” through court actions? Or does the public prefer a “moderated” and “modest” and eminently Canadian approach that we are learning about from this story?

There is no single story that defines the Canadian culture; there is however, a confluence of events, personalities, headlines and backroom arrangements that cumulatively generate a conception of the ‘public good’ and that public good is an extremely fragile entity, requiring the close attention not only of the political nerds, but also of the ordinary people whose lives it will inevitably shape for decades. 

*Canada Revenue Agency 

Monday, March 7, 2016

Putting the doctor assisted dying option in the spotlight....we vote "yes"


Here we go again!

With 40% of the Canadian population identifying with the Roman Catholic church, two of their leaders, this week, came out swinging against the proposal before the federal government to put forward a piece of legislation that would permit doctors to assist those in extreme circumstances to die. The Cardinal in Toronto, Thomas Collins, had read from every church pulpit in his diocese a letter condemning the proposal. The Bishop in Ottawa, Terry Prendergast, spoke to the National Post indicating that Catholics who chose this path to end their life would not be eligible for the “last rites”.

While the proponents of the legislation, a similar law already having been passed by the Quebec legislature, (historically the most “catholic” province in the country) argue that it is a human right, guaranteed, in their view, by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Naturally the Catholic leaders consider it an grave sin because, like abortion, it ‘takes a human life’. The debate in this country will likely heat up between now and June when, by order of the Supreme Court of Canada, the government must bring forward legislation that paves the way for doctor assisted dying.

As a non-Catholic, I can readily see the consistency of the Catholic position, that all life is sacred, and that any overt human action that usurps that life is evil. Contraception, abortion, doctor-assisted dying are all of a piece, under the requirements of their absolute position. And, it is precisely because of the absolute-ness of the Catholic position that it is and can and must be confronted.  

Already, millions of Roman Catholics practice some form of “artificial” birth control, under the supervision of their medical practitioner. Condoms and IUD’s have become common practice, when prospective parents weigh the choice of having more children (some of which they see as unaffordable, others as blocking their path to a career). And whether the church enforces some “liturgical sanction” on those who use contraceptives or not, everyone knows that the practice is ubiquitous. And, as part of the rationale for their position, some Catholics argue that the population of the world, projected to reach 9 billion in this century, will put a significant strain on the ecosystem, and the capacity of the people on the planet to feed, and to clothe and to education and deploy in work with dignity. That argument, however, is not as valid when applied to the debate over doctor assisted dying.

The Right to Life campaign to end a woman’s access to therapeutic abortion continues unabated, on both sides of the 49th parallel, with consider success especially in Texas where over half of the clinics in which the procedure had been performed have now closed, given the strict conditions required by new Texas law, a law that is being challenged in the Supreme Court. Even moderates in the United States agree that abortions must be both legal and therapeutic, particularly in the case of rape, incest or to protect the endangered life of a mother. In Canada, on the other hand, while access may be limited, especially in remote rural areas, and the campaign continues to garner support, the law is unlikely to be overturned any time soon.

Suicide, on the other hand, as a human act, has a history that links it to earlier conceptions of demons, mental illness and “craziness” with which previous historical periods simply could not deal. And anything that involved the taking of a life, whether by an outside agent or by the person inflicting the act on his or her own person, was considered evil. As the locus of the society’s definition of evil, the church’s role, while heavy and serious, was also one of attending to the long-term interests of the institution, the preservation of people of discipline continuing to life the “good life”. Rewards, of a heavenly nature, and sanctions of a, institutional nature were linked in a pattern of classical conditioning, that many considered sacred. Only as recently as 1977, the Canadian government removed the act of suicide from the Criminal Code, giving legal expression to the concept of mental health as a contributing factor in one’s taking one’s life. Since that time, obituaries that read, “suddenly,” are often ‘code’ for a death by suicide. Still, there is a hushed conversation about a possible suicide, and initiatives to prevent suicide have sprung up, helping family members and friends to take note of potential ‘symptoms’ of an impending suicide. Still, however, we hear comments like, “If only I had seen the signs!” from distraught family and friends of the deceased, following a suicide. Whether those individuals who espoused a Roman Catholic faith and committed suicide were given a church funeral is an open question; probably yes in some quarters, and no in others. So the church’s history is nothing if not perfectly clear and consistent, on the issue.

And now, under the pressure of individuals coming forward to seek medical help in ending their own life, a decision taken, for the most part, by those of sound mind who face a terminal illness, and/or the prospect of no end to their extreme suffering, governments whose members consider themselves “enlightened” have passed, or are considering passing laws that would make the intervention of a medical team that includes at least two doctors, and a patient of sound mind, including young people the law considers ‘minors’. One medical doctor, a specialist in disease control, from Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto, even went so far as to record his own plea for doctor assisted suicide, given the extreme pain his own cancer was inflicting on his person. It is not only one’s body, but also one’s mind and spirit that are overwhelmed by the pain of some illnesses. And the incapacity of the family to alleviate the suffering is also another important feature of such a family situation.

Palliative care, while important and less accessible that everyone would like, does attempt to make those in the end stages of their life comfortable, and as responsive as their condition permits. And everyone would approve of a significant enhancement of that flank of our national health care system. Hospitals, too, have included palliative care sections to their facilities, in addition to the several hospice facilities available in some centres. Nevertheless, there are still people suffering tragically and hopelessly in their own private cave of desperation, who would prefer, and whose families would prefer, that their suffering were brought to a dignified termination.

And, in the broader definition or conception of life, (that sacred concept), there is the life of the individual and the life of the family and the life of the community that has to be taken into account in any ethical consideration of one’s theological belief and practice. And that makes the question’s relevance, and perspective very different from a narrow definition of the biological nature of life. That consideration alone is legitimately considered by many to be a reductionistic approach to the issue.

It is the cookie-cutter rule, applied to circumstances not considered in the application, that renders those adherents to the rule infantilized. Faith, religion, ethics...these are both hard and complex questions, and the mystery of a human being's relationship with a deity is more complex and mysterious than virtually all other relationships. The power of the church, and its leadership, to presume to decide for sentient, mature, thinking and pondering, not to mention praying and reflecting humans on such momentous decisions as whether to conceive a child, or whether or not to end a child's life, or whether or not to choose to access doctor-assisted dying, is overhearing. In fact, setting such a 'bar' as the highest ethical value, is not only presumptuous (presuming to know God's mind) but also demeaning to the human capacity of free will, another of God's gifts to every human. And then to presume to punish those who defy the ecclesiastical edict only adds insult to injury. Taking a position of listening to, of counselling, and even of perhaps providing some mature advice would make much more sense of the relationship between human and God, and bring a different kind of agape to the situation that respects the ambiguity and the mystery and the nuances of every human being going through the decision-making process.

In all aspects of the question of the sacredness of life, contraception, abortion and assisted dying, the narrow definition of the application of the ethical principle is suspect because such an application,  while pure and consistent and absolute, negates the attenuating circumstances. For example, the capacity of the mother/family to give adequate care to an unexpected child, likely to be born out of marriage, to a single mother, in many cases, is a consideration for many women who have to bear the burden of parenthood alone. In the black community alone, in the United States, over 40% of children are born to single parents and as the access to therapeutic abortion atrophies, just today, the New York times writes that the search for back alley, and solo/private abortions will continue to grow. No law is going to prevent or stop men and women from engaging in the act of sexual intimacy, and birth control is not always going to be either available or chosen. No law is going to prevent reasonable and legitimate situations that require a woman to seek a therapeutic abortion. And while there is a reasonable attitude that says the fewer abortions the better for all, nevertheless, access to facilities that are staffed by trained professionals, in sterile atmospheres, with sterile medical equipment are all far more preferable to the former back alley, dark-night abortions of the past.

Similarly, in the case of assisted dying, the church’s absolute position does not fit all situations like a cookie-cutter. In fact, it is the absolute application of a principle to every situation that renders the church’s position untenable. It ignores a significant piece of scriptural evidence: that the relationship between an individual human being and his/her God is a private and personal one, that God does speak to individuals, and that the specific application of the agape love requires more than a single form, frame or approach. Theology, like ethics, is both highly contentious and profoundly impactful. And no one knows the fine details of anyone else’s life, history, belief system, world view, capacity to sustain whatever pressure is imposing itself on any individual. Hence, the argument of a single ecclesiastical law, decree, ethical bar, or gateway to God’s love and acceptance is not sustainable.

I would want any and all members of my family to be able to choose assisted dying should their circumstances make continuing their life unbearable, and should those circumstances be attested to by a panel of medical/ethical/family personnel in support of their decision. Should I become incapacitated, and subject to unbearable pain and suffering without any chance for a return to even a modicum of normal health, I would, along with Dr. Low from Mount Sinai, seek and exercise my right to assisted dying, if for no other reason than those who care about me would be relieved of their own stresses, anxieties and depressions that not only can I not recover, but they cannot, in conjunction with the medical team, improve the situation regarding my “end of life” process.
Of course, enhanced palliative care, including more hospices, would both expand the pathways to a peaceful end of life; nevertheless, the option of assisted dying, without medical professionals who participate having to face criminal charges, seems both ethical and reasonable, not to mention compassionate and ‘healthy’.

In those countries where the option already exists, there is little or no evidence that the option has been abused. The prospect that assisted dying be open to all ages, including the very young who can also suffer deeply from illness or accident, also makes good sense, and we look forward to the day when the Canadian government brings in legislation that considers the human rights of Roman Catholic medical professionals to opt out of having to provide this procedure, that builds in reasonable and responsible checks and balances to prevent both abuse and illegitimate use of the option, for private greed or gain.
 
And we will be watching, should the first draft presented to parliament not include extension of the option to minors, for that addendum to be added, following a reasonable period, possibly three years, during which the patterns of the applications and the choosing of assisted dying as an ethical option by mature adults, in consultation with their families, their doctors and a team of professionals including ethicists develops.

Saturday, March 5, 2016

Is it biopolitics or perhaps "narcissus-politics" that rules?

In March 1976, philosopher Michel Foucault described the advent of a new logic of government, specific to Western liberal societies. He called it biopolitics. States were becoming obsessed with the health and wellbeing of their populations.
And sure enough, 40 years later, Western states rarely have been more busy promoting healthy food, banning tobacco, regulating alcohol, organising breast cancer checks, or churning out information on the risk probabilities of this or that disease.
Foucault never claimed this was a bad trend – it saves lives after all. But he did warn that paying so much attention to the health and wealth of one population necessitates the exclusion of those who are not entitled to – and are perceived to endanger – this health maximisation programme.
Biopolitics is therefore the politics of live and let die. The more a state focuses on its own population, the more it creates the conditions of possibility for others to die, “exposing people to death, increasing the risk of death for some people.
Rarely has this paradox been more apparent than in the crisis that has seen hundreds of thousands of people seeking asylum in Europe over the past few years. It is striking to watch European societies investing so much in health at home and, at the same time, erecting ever more impermeable legal and material barriers to keep refugees at bay, actively contributing to human deaths. (Live and let die: did Michel Foucault predict Europe’s refugee crisis?, from The Conversation, February 26, 2016)
While there is considerable evidence supporting Foucault's "biopolitics" notion, it can be argued, these forty years later, that "bio", or an emphasis on biology and preventing illness, has been replaced by "narcissus-politics" in which, human ambition for whatever feeds personal instant gratification is ruling the barnyard.
Obsession with personal hygiene, health, perfect grammar and spelling (spoiler alert: 65% of women in the United States say that grammar errors by their male partners would be a deal-breaker on further dating), having the most up-to-date tech device, driving the most coveted car, wearing the most chic attire, coveting the largest corner office with the largest stock option package, and turning a deaf ear to the plight of millions of starving, displaced and least likely to survive indigents (refugees, migrants, the incarcerated, the unemployed, the underemployed, the millions who have simply stopped looking for or expecting employment, while seeking access to both prescription and illicit drugs, and bullying all those who block, confront or even disagree with a chosen point of view and a career path or an ideological conviction.....
these are some of the symptoms of the narcissism that has grown to epidemic proportions in our political system.
Any ordinary citizen, with only a nominal stethoscope that includes a television and a computer screen, living in the most remote location, can smell the decay that is wreaking havoc in obviously open geopolitical abscesses that simply will not stop hemorrhaging their puss. And while there are nominal attempts to determine both the causes and the remedies for these open political sores, if the patient (the planet) were admitted to the emergency room of a well-staffed and well-equipped hospital for treatment, after a few x-rays, MRI's and CTScans, the patient would be sent home with a note for a pain-killer prescription and a diagnosis note on the discharge document that read: Undetermined diagnosis.
We have more statistical data from more sources, with more software programs to collate, analyse and predict the probability of these symptoms repeating, under similar conditions, we have no ability, no willingness and no courage to face our own conundrums square on, knowing that all the technology and the meta-data will not be much use with the essential conscription of our human will to tell the truth to ourselves and to our leaders.
We are obsessed with the pursuit of happiness, itself a hollow goal, so ephemeral and so illusive that, although billions have been spent in its diagnosis and its prescriptions and grad schools have granted graduate degrees for disciples to spread the word, we are not only no closer to realizing its potential. In fact, in our pursuit of its gift, we have lost ground in our development of the strengths of character/muscle/courage/ through our having avoided paying attention to their importance.
We are, as a species, much more interested in finding blame for our troubles than in finding responsibility for our individual and our collective circumstances.
In our workplaces, we reduce our workers to machines with production quotas;
In our schools, we reduce our students to cognitive scores, in their competitive march to post-secondary education.
In our families, we reduce our relationships to "transactional interactions" based on good vibes for good performances, and bad vibes for lesser behaviour.
In our churches, we reduce the people in the pews to children, whose need for attention and black/white answers trumps a healthy search in the ambiguities of each faith pilgrimage, and then demand their philanthropy as signs of their spiritual health.
In our towns and cities, we "certify" our public officials, after they meet specific criteria, and then watch as they under-or-over-perform their duties depending on their need for their own agenda.
In our newsrooms, we reward the reporter who breaks the story first, providing the instant gratification of the best ratings tonight, regardless of whom that story broke the lives of unnamed sources, so long as we 'won' the ratings war.
In the military, we subject recruits to a form of  brainwashing that legitimizes absolute power and authority and obedience to that symbol of power and authority, the commander, under the argument that every recruit has to follow orders, so that we each have each other's back in danger.
In our corporations, we reward the biggest deal for the largest account, and the agent who achieved that account, rendering others, implicitly, as "less than" and then wonder why our bars and our pubs are filled after work each day, and our emergency rooms are filled with those whose depression and/or anger has rendered them in need of help, whether from formal accidents or from self-inflicted abuse.
And, we continue to hold as sacred, this competitive model in all activities, as the "generator" of all of human achievements, while thousands of athletes, for example, join a class-action suit upon review of the overwhelming evidence that their sport literally killed them, (while making their masters/owners millionaires). And we continue to laud the "business model" of their sport, and many if not most other for-profit organizations, that treat their human component as mere "raw materials" in a production line of entertainment, or products or services, and our air and water as simply other raw materials in our machines-for-profit.
And then, to add insult to injury, we take our profits off shore where there are no or barely any income taxes to be paid, thereby fleecing our workers and their communities, to serve our greed and narcissism.
And our greed and our narcissism, in themselves, are neither criminal nor are they evidence of culpability, in our headlong rush to "success".
We simply do not give a damn about "the other" no matter who the other happens to be. And we care even less for those "others" who do not speak our language, who do not worship our 'god', who do not have the same colour of skin as we do, and who 'invade' our space in their attempt to escape their own trauma.
And then, if we happen to shed a single tear for the less-fortunate, and, like Canada, bring in some 25,000 refugees from the Syrian and the Afghan conflict zones, we pat ourselves on the back as if we were heroes, when we have merely assuage our guilty conscience, and fed our national pride because we are 'better than" those countries, like the United States who refuse to accept such refugees.
It is not that we should not lend a helping hand, in modest ways; Rather it is that we should be crying out in protest of the way we think the world and the economy should operate. We should be demanding the reigning in of corporate greed, and of political narcissism, especially those examples that seek to satisfy their own personal gratification, without regard for the larger pictures of human plight that surround us on all side.
If we are unable and unwilling to see the other as "one of us" then how will we ever come to the place where a shared eco-system requires our universal, total and long-term protection?
How will we ever come to the place where we no longer need or even want nuclear weapons?
How will we ever come to the place where biological and chemical weapons no longer belong on the planet anywhere, anytime?
How will we ever come to the place where we replace our narcissism and greed, in a world whose scarcity and plenty are continually in conflict, with authentic compassion, collaboration, and commitment to the survival of all?
The short answer is, "We wont!"

Thursday, March 3, 2016

The American light in the "beacon on the hill" is flickering from suffocation....thanks to Trump


Der Spiegel calls it Madness!

People on the streets of Great Britain cry, “It’s terrifying!”

The president of CBS declares that Trump will be good for corporate profits.

And the mucky-mucks in the Republican Party are shovelling propaganda into former candidate Mitt Romney who is to be charged with delivering the knock out speech intended to derail the Trump fascist train. Now that we have the transcript of the Romney diatribe, we know that Trump Vodka, and Trump whatever including the Trump University have all failed, portraying Trump, not as the successful businessman he pretends but rather as a business failure. A fraud and a con-man are essentially the themes that Romney focussed on.

Trouble is, Romney is already emasculated as a political figure and the masses have already been aroused in some kind of ‘rock-concert’ frenzy of uber masculinity that wreeks of racism, sexism, and American jingoism, chauvinism and a war for the heart and the soul of the American enterprise....Building faux universities, and skyscrapers whose glass is falling off in Toronto, and casinos in Jersey that close and hiring thousands of illegal immigrants, ordering the blocking of the American border to Muslims (“until we figure this out”) and deploying eminent domain to evict an elderly widow (unsuccessfully) will look like painting that lipstick on a pig, when compared with a foreign policy that “bombs the hell out of them” and “makes the Mexicans pay for a wall” and “makes America great again”!

And, not only is Romney ineffectual, the army of the masses has already taken over the Trump campaign, and, just as the black folks who interrupted his rally were evicted without respect, so too will all opposition to this juggernaut be rolled over, as if the leader were one of the bulldozers he deploys to clear the ground for his real estate projects,

“Get them out’o’here” would be a more appropriate slogan for the Trump campaign. Any voice with whom Il Duce disagrees is silenced. All voices of protest are considered incompetent losers. Bullying through ad hominums will look like a frat party if this man is permitted the keys to the White House. Kim Jong Il and Putin will be drunk with joy at some virtual bar, hosted by the new “leader of the free world” if this man continues to be courted by the ugly, restive and unapproachable masses of homophobes, racists, xenophobes, and ultimately control-freaks who have “glom’d” onto this mass movement wrapped and guilded in the kind of propaganda for which George Orwell warned his readers.

Peace is War, War is Peace, and the Truth Ministry is charged with re-writing history to conform with current reality, whatever the leaders say that is in 1984. The only truth that matters is the truth that is declared by the cabal in charge. The only truth that really matters is that the leader is sacred and the leader is in charge, promising only good things for the people whom he “serves”. And truth be told, (if that is still feasible!) the only one he serves is himself, his monomaniacal ego, and his ambition, both dramatic images for his monumental insecurity and narcissism.

Born in the middle of the second world war (1942), I have often wondered about the courage and the defiance of my parents, that, in the face of the most horrific stories from the “front”, they made a joint decision to conceive their first child, after nearly eight years of marriage. Although my father was not formally conscripted, (he was granted exemption to serve the war machine by meeting its massive and urgent retail needs, in close proximity to a defence production factory) he nevertheless warrants, along with my mother, a medal of family honour for his courage, and his resilience to serve at a much less heralded level, without the badges, the stripes and the marching bands and the weapons. He did not tell me stories of the ‘front’ because he simply was not there. He did, however, work tirelessly to serve those who were making the weapons and who were keeping the home ‘front’ functioning in the war effort. And his story is not especially unique; everyone knew what they were fighting for, and what they were fighting against. And, once again, the whole world knows that this (Trump/American) response to the current vortex of a transitioning economy, a threatened ecosystem, a tsunami of refugees from barely paused military conflict, a rising tide of nuclear ambitions, the loss of jobs at home and the focus on undocumented immigrants...is the last thing the world needs, wants, deserves or can cope with.

And, in this struggle we are all Americans. And we are joined in a struggle to thwart these personal ambitions that are threatening to subvert not only the American democracy, but also to extinguish the signal American democracy sends around the world for millions who continue to see in America a ‘beacon on a hill’ for themselves and their children and grandchildren. And whether we claim American as our homeland, or either of the political parties in that country as our’s, or we are citizens of a different country, on whatever continent, for citizens of the world, standing idly by and remaining silent is not  an option. We are all, like the woman in the CBS interview from London, terrified  by the prospect of a Trump presidency.
We need to read Chris Hedges column from today, on truthdig.com (The Revenge of the Lower Classes and the Rise of American Fascism) and we all need to speak up at whatever water fountain we frequent and send cash if we are able to a campaign like that of Bernie Sanders (who raised $40 million in February, compared with only $32 for Hillary Clinton). This fight, not only for the White House, but for the future of the planet, requires the voices of all reasonable, compassionate and committed individuals who seek peace, collaboration, clean air and water and who know that greed and narcissism are deep and heavily defended enemies of the public good although they represent the values of too many who do truly stand to profit from a Trump presidency.

Blacks living in the inner cities are not going to get the jobs Trump promises; nor are they going to get the free tuition and the education that Bernie Sanders promise. Women are going to watch the number of abortion clinics close, just as they have already in Texas, in the case currently before the crippled Supreme Court (following the death of Antonin Scalia, and the refusal of the Republican Senate even to hold confirmation hearings and a vote to confirm). Muslims and Mexicans, both those already living in the United States, and those seeking to enter, are going to face increasing jolts of racism, masquerading as pity, under Trump’s leadership and example. ISIS, Al Nusra, Al Shabbab, amd all the other radical Islamic terrorists are, and will continue to find in Trump an energizer bunny recruiting machine. (One Muslim from Egypt has already been taken into custody, and will face a deportation hearing tomorrow, following a “bad joke” Facebook page in which he allegedly offered to knock Trump off, presenting the offer to his friends in the Muslim community who were offended by Trump’s throwing the Muslim community under the bus.

Letting ISIS remove Assad, and then taking over what’s left of Syria, as Trump would have us believe, is his choice of foreign policy, if anyone can bend his/her mind around that intellectual flatulence. Oh, and by the way, Trump wants to “bomb the hell out of ISIS”.....on his way to taking on China in a trade war, while also building that fifty-foot wall to keep out the Mexicans, most of whom are “drug dealers, prostitutes and bad people” according to the Trump world view.

Holding fast to a single principle, aside from self-aggrandizement, is something Trump is unable and unwilling to do. Consequently, he can and will deny anything and everything upon being challenged and if he were to assume office, could and would do whatever he “liked” with the same kind of bravado he displays when he tells the world that his voters are so loyal, he could shoot and kill someone on Fifth Avenue,without losing a single vote.

No, Mr. Trump. Such as act would be immediately followed by your arrest; your being charged and your being held for trial, pending a  bail hearing, which just might not be able to be purchased, using whatever currency you might be willing to offer. Further, the world is beginning to see through your veil of deception, into your cold, cold heart, notwithstanding the pleas of a small circle who think you might be the “second coming”.

Although you have apparently escaped relatively unscathed from all the mud that has been thrown at and on you, and although you have succeeded in fooling some of the people some of the time, not even you can fool all of the people all of the time.

And time will bear that out!

Tuesday, March 1, 2016

Outliers breed and support outliers.....


There are some disturbing images on our television screens, from various quarters. While thankfully there is a slight pause in the bombing of Syria, on the border between Greece and Macedonia, refugees by the thousands from Syria, Afghanistan and other failing regions, are met with tear gas and stun guns when they use a battering ram to destroy a fence. In the United States, as Blacks protest a Trump rally, to Trumps dictatorial edict, “Get ‘em out!” following his “I’m only going to say it once, “All lives matter!” a Secret Service agent is filmed throwing a Time magazine reporter down, first smashing his head on a table and then throwing him to the floor at the same rally.

Ironically, and as a perfect foil, the President is honouring a Navy Seal with the Medal of Honour, for saving the life of one of his team in an invasion of a Taliban hold-out in Afghanistan. Violence, in pursuit of whatever goals seem urgent, by whatever individuals or groups, is the language of influence. And that includes the violence of the stump rhetoric through which human dignity, human decency, human honour, human cohesion and collaboration are all thrown under the bus in pursuit of power...by those already in power, through either political status or wealth.

And when the bar is lowered fully to the ground, can it go lower?

Pundits are predicting the breaking apart of the Republican Party of Lincoln and Reagan. Some like Chris Hedges are predicting the breaking apart of the republic, given the irreparable divide between the corporate structure and the people. Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany was heard telling an interviewer yesterday that Europe must not abandon Greece and her overwhelming problem with refugees to blow in the wind. And yet, the antipathy to refugees grows in all towns and cities across Europe, while the numbers continue virtually unabated even in the middle of the coldest weather. Great Britain is about to vote on June 23rd to answer the question about whether to remain part of the EU, with Prime Minister Cameron facing serious opposition from the Mayor of London who advocates separation. The argument in some quarters is that, should Britain exit the EU, Scotland will likely exit the United Kingdom.

There is a pervasive sense that far from a chip on the shoulder of those who feel alienated from the community, now there is a large segment of the community that has a tree growing where there was once a chip. Anger, disaffection, disillusionment, and even hopelessness have infected the body politic, to a degree that has not been so deep and so pervasive. And the information we are being “fed” from around the world is also not encouraging, not hopeful, and not inspiring back home.

And there are so many places to lay responsibility both inside the United States, and abroad.

First, inside:

Physics tells us that for every action there is an equal and opposite action. Some would argue that Obama’s legacy of moderation, temperance, resistance to war even to the opportunity to drop bombs on Syria when it was proven that Assad had used chemical weapons on his people (preferring a Russian intervention that assisted the removal of those weapons) has played a role in generating the virulent form of overt and shameless demand for “bombing the hell out of them” (as Trump promises to do to ISIS). It is a similar demand from many Americans, even directed at the establishment(s) in both Republican and Democratic parties. Some would argue that the Wall Street “cabal” that underwrites many of the political campaigns of those seeking the White House, excluding Bernie Sanders shoulders considerable responsibility for having gutted the housing market and left millions stranded under water in their mortgages. Some would argue that trade agreements that provide opportunity to flood America with foreign-produced products, while preventing a similar exchange of American products into those countries flooding the American market have gutted much of the manufacturing sector in America eliminating millions of well paid jobs. Some would argue that Republican obstructionism from the first day of the Obama administration has so completely emasculated government leaving only token and ceremonial tasks to Washington, and has thereby also generated a level of contempt for the political process and the onslaught of  protest is indiscriminately fired off at all purporting to be politicians, including the president. Shootings of young black men by white police officers, incarceration of millions of blacks and Latinos for minor offences, while neglecting to hold Wall Street financiers accountable for what they did to the economy, the over and blatant poisoning of the water system in Flint Michigan (an act for which only criminal charges would be even remotely appropriate given the mental and social impairment by lead poisoning of a generation of children), and a nadir in respect for anyone considered a political opponent...these all have a share in the responsibility for the cancer of disillusionment that in metastasizing across America. And the media, so addicted to the ratings spikes that it can and will see only into the next nanosecond, parsing as it does every last syllable of the childish “debate” among presidential candidates, adamantly determined to cover only the hose race aspect of the presidential campaign, as well as the limitless blocks on any legislative proposal, (ignoring the merits, along with any full parsing of the policy alternatives of the candidates), is merely a vehicle for both the corporate vacuums sucking as much cash from the billions spent on advertising and for the pugilists in the campaign ‘ring’. Even Melissa Harris-Perry’s intelligent, provocative and courageous examination of political and cultural issues on Saturday and Sunday mornings on MSNBC has been cancelled, given her being victimized by executives demanding higher ratings,
(which translated means only wall-to-wall coverage of the horse race).

But let’s look at something both difficult to write and speak about, and also extremely difficult to experience: over hatred, contempt, bigotry and bullying tactics.

Back in the last decade of the last century, I served as an “alien” in a rural area of the United States, on the west side of the Continental Divide. From Canada, I was first considered a “novelty” especially since those for whom I worked had tried in vain for two years to acquire the services of an American to fill the role. As part of the novelty chapter of this saga, I was subjected to the most reductionistic parameters of the proposed ‘service’ I was expected to offer. And the reductionism resulted directly from a conventional perception of the “ability to pay”, based on the skeleton of individuals (6) who were still attempting to preserve a vestige of this community. Linked to the perceived ability to pay, was another heinous perception: the absolute need for complete control on the part of those ‘hiring’, especially considering the risk of taking on a “foreigner”. Arriving as a single and divorced male, I quickly learned that had I been accompanied by a black spouse, I would not have been offered the position.(I was told directly and offensively about this prior condition, not made available upon entry.) Not only were parsimony and absolute control inherent among the tiny group, so was a degree of racism that effectively painted me as a “black” in white skin. The writers of the Quebec Revolution in the 70’s called people like themselves, White Niggers given their perception of the subjugation of Quebecers by the rest of Canada, at that time.

Naively, however, I did not foresee my “outsidedness” nearly as clearly as I might have. Nor was there any source among the American cohort willing to or interested in orienting me to the deep and ugly realities of American life in the ‘wild west’. Pushing past the initial minimalist offering, I secured something like full-time work, only to learn that the interest among the group in sharing anything, including time, thoughts, perceptions, emotions or even aspirations was non-existent. These were “siloed” individuals living in a wall-off ghetto silo, able to perpetuate their contempt for anything outside their suffocating walls. Their walls were mental, physical, cultural, emotional, political and even spiritual. Never has there been a more obvious cloister of parochial, frozen, and neurotic both group and individual members.

These people had access to full hygienic facilities, without the benefits of a world view that might have accompanied the amenities, at least a century earlier. These people were the forerunners of the Trump cavalcade. They were angry for many valid and invalid reasons; they were self-styled outliers, even outlaws, of the kind that currently frequent the Trump rallies. They were frozen in their contempt for the “other”, and their other included this Canadian, the people from the big cities, the people who had graduated university, and especially the people of the “east” whom their considered both effeminate and offensive. For example, one of the complaints about me was that I read  books, and proposed ideas from books written by scholars, many of whom lived and worked in some of the cities on the eastern seaboard. And they were so contemptuous that in one specific situation, I was dubbed “another pinko communist bastard” just as Nixon had dubbed Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau. My experience occurred in 1999, indicating the longevity of the “type” that continued to survive among these outliers.

Trump has given voice to these people, to their fears and to their alienation. He seduces them with candy-floss promises to which he is not now and never was and never will be committed. He rides the wave of their energy, prompting ever more intensity each time he takes a microphone. Racism, inverse snobbery, contempt for moderation, sacralising the hard power to be deployed in all situations....and a highly loose and suspect command of reality (except the reality of the kool-aid Trump is peddling). These people, like the people on the western side of the continental divide are reminiscent of the people who drank the kool-aid in Jonestown. Only, Trump is merely offering the canapés to his banquet of deception and duplicity, the lofty promises, not promises really but rather mere sound and fury signifying only a personal narcissism of such proportions that evoke images of all the dictators from history.

And, his lead in the race merely paints a picture of a society and a culture immune to the truth, to the dangers of his rise to power, immune to the profound complexities of issues the world has never had to grapple with.

And the rest of the world, including those of us north of the 49th parallel, are not only watching; we are shuddering in our boots, fearful that two men, Putin and Trump could each have their fingers on the nuclear buttons, if the current evidence continues to unfold as predicted by many. And so too could Kim Jong Un, as well as the insiders in Pakistan. If we thought we faced dangers before Trump (BT) try to get your mind around the dangers With Trump (WT).