Category: Politics

Posted on

GOP Speak: You can talk about it, just don’t mention it

Almost 75 years after it was published, George Orwell’s novel 1984 has nothing on today’s Republican Party when it comes to language.  The novel features such ideological practices as “newspeak” and “doublethink” that conform language to the needs of a society’s authoritarian leadership to maintain control of its population.  Newspeak is a minimalist language designed to make the utterance of heretical thoughts–those that challenge central authority–impossible.   Doublethink refers to the ability to believe and say that black is white, in contradiction of plain facts, in order to uphold the regime.

Does any of this sound familiar today?  Since the rise of “Trumpism” in the Republican Party, we have seen the explosion not only of blatant lies, but also the creation of “alternative” facts to support law-free rule.  We have seen “Don’t say gay” restrictions for the early grades of schools in Florida, and the deletion of critical race theory from curriculums ranging up to college level.  Lately we’ve seen an apparently new development in the distortion of language in the service of ideological manipulation:  the notion that one can speak of things without mentioning what they are about.

This rang a bell for me, one that rings back half a century in my work life and that I have always since associated with the most destructive elements of conservative politics in the U.S.  Perhaps it is no small coincidence that Orwell’s book was published on my mother’s birthday in the year that I was born. Continue reading “GOP Speak: You can talk about it, just don’t mention it”

Posted on

Can an American Political Party Commit Treason?

If recent political developments in the U.S. are any indication, the answer could appear to be yes.

Last week, the former president of the United States, Donald Trump, was indicted by the U.S. Department of Justice on 37 felony counts for illegal retention of classified national defense documents and obstruction of justice.  The first 31 charges assert violations of the federal Espionage Act.

This week he was arraigned in the federal district court in Miami for the charges.  His taking of very sensitive national security documents when he left the White House in January 2021, and his attempts to hide many of them from the federal government’s efforts to retrieve them, constitute the most blatant political crimes against the nation’s security in American history. Continue reading “Can an American Political Party Commit Treason?”

Posted on

Mass Shootings and Insanity

Saturday, May 6, 2023, a mall in Allen, Texas:  eight dead, including children, and at least seven more injured.  In America we don’t need the headline above to know what happened there.  It is only the latest event in an epidemic, a plague of guns, a monsoon of bullets.

In just the past two weeks there have been mass shootings–defined as events in which at least four people are shot–in Cleveland, Texas (five killed), outside Tulsa, Oklahoma (six killed), and Atlanta, Georgia (one killed, four injured).  It is only spring, but already this year there have been at least 202 mass shootings, more than the number of days so far in 2023.  Last year, there were at least 647 of them.

Shootings are now the top cause of death of children and teens in the greatest nation on earth. Continue reading “Mass Shootings and Insanity”

Posted on

Thoughts on an Indictment

The first indictment of Donald Trump has landed.  Certainly there are more to come.  In the meanwhile, the indictment by the New York City grand jury and prosecutor has already created feverish media reactions and the expected bombast from the former U.S. president.  What to make of it all?  These thoughts come to mind.

The Media

In our digital age, the mainstream (traditional) media are also all about attracting eyeballs, most especially our television news programs.  Thus, the coverage to this point–before the indictment charges are even revealed–has been, well, hysterical.  It’s odd, isn’t it?  Trump refers to them as the “Fake News” media, and yet he is able to play them to his advantage like a fiddle.  They cannot get enough of him, his antics and his predicaments.  He is addicted to their attention, and they are happy to provide it. Continue reading “Thoughts on an Indictment”

Posted on

Is the Rule of Law a Chimera?

The term “chimera” has come to describe . . . anything composed of disparate parts or perceived as wildly imaginative, implausible, or dazzling.  Wikipedia

We are hearing about the Rule of Law quite a lot these days in the nation’s political dialogue.  I am wondering how the phrase is hitting the American ear.  Is it properly understood?  Is it considered important?  Why are we hearing it now only from one side of the political aisle?  Does it matter?  Does it exist?

The basic premise of the Rule of Law is easy to understand.  No one is above the law.  Everyone is equal under the law.  The law plays no favorites.  More dramatically, the Rule of Law is a sine qua non of democracy itself, of the people’s self-rule.  Without Law’s Rule, there can be no democratic form of government.  If any person or group is above the law, then by definition there is no democracy.  There is either autocracy or totalitarianism. Continue reading “Is the Rule of Law a Chimera?”

Posted on

Will the U.S. Prosecute the Former President for Insurrection and Other Crimes?

No doubt you have noticed the ongoing question of whether and when the U.S. Attorney General, Merrick Garland, will prosecute Donald Trump for alleged crimes he committed in the period leading up to the 2020 election and thereafter.  While the House of Representatives Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol has already publicized evidence of presidential crimes, the Attorney General has been silent on the status of investigations into the former president’s conduct regarding his effort to have the election of President Joe Biden overturned, which led to the insurrection at the nation’s capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.  Meanwhile, according to a poll released this week, almost 60 percent of Americans believe Trump should be prosecuted for crime in connection with the insurrection. Continue reading “Will the U.S. Prosecute the Former President for Insurrection and Other Crimes?”

Posted on

Whither the Supreme Court? Notes on Law, Abortion and Religion

For more than 30 years I taught the sociology of law to both undergraduate and graduate university students.  We considered how American law developed, how it was applied to persons and groups, and with what effects on them and on the broader society.

When discussing the U.S. Supreme Court, I emphasized that the traditional law school approach to its decision-making was wrong.  There, students have been commonly trained that legal reasoning is a learned skill much like that in scientific work.  It is based on principles of deduction, according to which judges make decisions about laws by logically figuring out how the principles established in earlier court decisions–precedents–apply to the current dispute before them.  In this perspective, judicial decision-making–especially in the higher courts with the best trained lawyers–is a matter of technique.  It produces the correct legal answers based on facts and reason, free of bias and personal belief.  Competent practitioners, therefore, should reach the same, right, answers.

Although the American legal establishment placed a lot of faith in this account, and asked the nation to do the same,  it was never a true story.

Of course, if it were, how could the Supreme Court issue so many decisions with 5-4 votes?  More dramatically now, how could it be that today’s Supreme Court appears to be little more than a radical Right redoubt, one on the verge of retracting a basic right finally granted to women by the Court almost 50 years ago? Continue reading “Whither the Supreme Court? Notes on Law, Abortion and Religion”

Posted on

The GOP Is Ground Zero for American Racism

For a while there have been versions of this saying:  Not all Republicans are racist, but if you are a racist the Republican Party is the party for you.

Now this may be taken in either of two ways in terms of the GOP.   The less consequential–even somewhat anodyne–meaning is that American racists are attracted to the Republican Party because it has long favored tough-on-crime policies and low taxes/small government policies, which have always translated into harsh punishments of and weak federal support for poor people, among whom minority populations figure disproportionately.  This view can seem to insulate the Party itself from charges of racism and racial animus.

The other way of reading the statement is not only less forgiving–it is condemnatory.  This view asserts that the Party itself is racist at its core.  Its basic principles and fundamental operations are racist.  They are dedicated to the protection and strengthening of white dominance–and domination–in the United States.  They are racially exclusionary.  Today, in the 21st century, the Republican Party is the nation’s beating heart of systemic racism at both the national and state levels.  It is the principal mechanism of institutional discrimination against minorities of color.  As a result, whether or not individual Republicans feel that they are racist, supporting today’s GOP while remaining silent on its racist policies is itself a racist act.

Sadly, there is no plausible argument against this second reading.  There is no rational or factual way to challenge this conclusion.  There is only the denial of truth, something else that the GOP has adopted as a routine part of its operations that serves its racist purposes. Continue reading “The GOP Is Ground Zero for American Racism”

Posted on

Will Freedom Kill Liberty?

You may recall the now-iconic phrase that emerged during the Tea Party rise in our national politics around the 2010 elections:  “Take your government hands off my Medicare!”   Now there was a valid point to it–Republicans in Congress were threatening to pass a budget that would end “Medicare as we know it.”

But the directive also betrayed a deep confusion about the role of the national government in citizens’ lives, suggesting that a major social safety net program was not a program of government.  Indeed, political science research published in 2010 found that 40 percent of Medicare recipients surveyed denied that they had ever benefitted from a government social program.

Laughable as this level of civic ignorance struck many of us at the time, in fact it poses a significant threat to the stability and security of American society.  If citizens badly misunderstand their basic relationships with government, then they are more vulnerable to the distortions and appeals of demagogues. Continue reading “Will Freedom Kill Liberty?”

Posted on

A Note on Language and Politics

Many of us may recall a subtle shift in political language that began during the last decade, maybe longer ago now.  Prominent members of the Republican Party began to refer to the opposing party as the “Democrat” Party.  We had all grown up knowing it as the “Democratic” party, and its candidates as the “Democratic” candidates.  Now, to the GOP, they are the “Democrat” candidates . . . or it is the “Democrat” position, and etc.  From Republican mouths, the word often sounds as if an epithet is being spit out.  For them, it has come to be a term of derision if not of disgust, much more (and less) than the name of an opposition party.  No matter: some even in the mainstream media appear to have adopted the term. Continue reading “A Note on Language and Politics”

Verified by MonsterInsights