Another (and another, etc) school shooting

 Many Americans are upset about the continual stream of shootings, but seem powerless to do anything serious about it.  The shooting in Nashville is dominating the news.  Those in charge don't seem alarmed enough about the highest rate of shootings in the world.  It is a conundrum that while gun deaths are exceptionally high, reducing them is such a political difficulty.

 One of the drivers of a demand for gun rights is fear.  It seems some really do want protection and they feel their own gun is the most reliable solution.  It likely does work for some people, at least for awhile.

There is another set of people who feel it gives them power, power unimaginable with out it.  Kyle Rittenhouse, underage felt righteous shooting to death some rioters protesting yet another black murder.

Underneath these human motivations are business motivations, after all money is heavily involved.   Gun makers and other manufacturers with supplementary interests are competing with other economic entities for the public's consumption.  Fear is good for sales.

Distorting the 2nd Amendment is done by slick operators.  Some make it seem guns are necessary to protect citizens from the government. Yes the government does indeed ultimately rely on gun power to enforce their laws, but the early American government really did need to boost their military defensive capabilities and not so much to arm those who disliked the laws.

There is an element of racism which might be a little more complicated.  It does seem that many whites fear blacks, others hate them and still others don't want them to get benefits that they get.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/06/dying-of-whiteness.html

The real underlying money motivation is to reduce taxes and deregulate.  The really rich realize their complaints don't generate much sympathy, but racism, abortion, LGBT concerns, and gun rights make sure their representatives have power to block unfavorable legislation and often with help from the electoral system they can dictate legislation more to their tastes.  

Actions cannot succeed if people do not feel safe--amongst other steps they need to see that gun ownership is a two edged sword--it encourages wider spread ownership--it increases the chances of an "accident" and provides wider opportunities for others unhappy with how they see the world.  Suicide is also more common when vulnerable people have easier access to effective means.

Lots of restrictions have been proposed such as banning assault weapons for personal use or requiring background checks.  Such measures need to be adopted, but more importantly fear and hate need to be reduced.  That cannot be legislated.

Education is very important.  Some politicians have wanted to restrict true black history.  The United States has had a bad history with minority races and have avoided dealing with it.  Slavery is in the past, but its legacy lingers.  Indigenous were displaced from their land.  Asians and Jews have also suffered discrimination.  It really is a matter of understanding differences.

Religion is very personal, but when imposed on others can lead to violence.  Learning to respect others' beliefs is important.

Homosexuality is normal, but makes others feel uncomfortable.  More have come out of the closet and others have asserted their rights, but still there is resentment. 

Conflict resolution offers more effective ways of winding down tensions.  Listening to understand should be encouraged.

Mental health is often used as an explanation, but not enough is done.  Ironically many mentally ill people are apt to be the victims of gun violence.  Certainly a "sound mind in a sound body" is good for everyone. Money for training professionals would help on multiple fronts.

Politicians lead by example.  Some hate speech is obvious and somehow needs to be curbed.  Dog whistles keep tensions higher than necessary.  It is true it is possible to hate quietly, but outward expression fans it.  Politicians are sensitive to what their voters want, so ultimately it falls to the rest of us to set the agenda. 

I am sick that news casts are interrupted so often for another shooting and still nobody does anything to alleviate the obvious pain.  Other issues are neglected--climate change, nuclear proliferation, pollution that are tied to profit motive that hurt everyone and pandemics that somehow have become politicized.  Another shooting in the near future will demonstrate how pathetic politicians are at solving real problems.

Raatchasi

One thing that promotes equality is education.  That is if everyone gets quality education. that is still an ideal that many are struggling to achieve.  "Raatchasi" (2019) focuses on a group of people who have to fight against vested interests.  Partly it is a private school system but also partly it is complacency.  

The existing teacher staff has become lazy and allowed their knowledge and skills to atrophy.  The drop out rate is large with many quitting as soon as old enough.  The new headmistress, Geetha is determined to change that, but over the course of the film she encounters resistance.  She found an English teacher who couldn't speak English, a math teacher who didn't understand about computers, a history teacher who didn't understand purpose was to not repeat mistakes.  She felt arts and sports were important and motivating.

Recognizing money is a big part of the problem, one of her tools is to charge up fundraising.   The private school owner, Ramalingam, feels it is in his best interest to tamp down any government revenue going to their school system.  He senses Geetha is making progress and sends some goons to curtail her, but are surprised to learn she is a skilled fighter.  She is not only smart, but understanding and eventually gains the support of the staff and parents, but not before overcoming many obstacles.

Director was Sy Gowthamraj, written by Bharathi Thambi and produced by S.R. Prabhu and S.R. Prakashbabu who also produced  "Taanakkaran" (2022).  One comment when school budget challenged by the police budget was that education lessens the need for the police.   Check:   http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2022/04/taanakkaran-colonial-police-legacy.html

Music by Sean Roldan who did "Jai Bhim" (2021)--see below.  Also composed for "Mehandi Circus" (2019).

Cinematography by Gokul Benoy.

Editor Philomin Raj who also did "Jai Bhim"  Mehandi Circus" (2019) and "Mandela" (2021) .  Check http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2021/04/mandela-tamil-satire-with-apt.html

Joythika played the heaadmistress Geetha and won an award for the role.  Other films include "Thambi" (2019) and with her husband, Suriyv she produced one of the highest ever IMDB rated films "Jai Bhim"  Check   http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2021/11/jai-bhim.html

 Hareesh Peradi played Ramalingam, the private school owner, a not very likable character.  Hareesh has been in both the Malayalam and Tamil films industries.  His movies include "Pulimurugan" (2016), "Vikram Vedha" (2017), "Mersal" (2017) and "Thambi" (2019).

The world is better off the more education can be spread around.  Trump once commended the "poorly educated" for their support.

As usual I have bolded the first mention of films I have seen.

The Sum of Us

The title "The Sum of Us" is in contrast to a common underlying feeling many racists have of a Zero Sum relation by which they mean any advantage given to other races is at their expense.  Heather McGhee feels that racial harmony is beneficial to all races.  In fact the book outlines many instances where whites have hurt themselves with their hatred and indifference of blacks.

This book aligns with my belief that racism will not end until we all understand that it hurts EVERYBODY.  Most of us privileged ones are unaware of the costs of racism.

 One early example was an identified racist who studied librairies in different states before the American Civil War.  He discovered that in slave states there were significantly fewer librairies than were in non slave states.  He reasoned that wealth was concentrated among slave owners who were able to restrict funds spent on the poorer white citizens.  This pattern has continued into modern times with less public expenditures in the former slave states.

The Republicans and their 1% supporters have an economic plan that involves paying less taxes and having less regulations.  This will allow them to exploit the less fortunate.  Stated bluntly, most voters would not accept this, so another strategy has emerged.  Stir up natural prejudices and cast blame elsewhere.  Racism and homophobia are effective tools. 

We are somewhat aware of many methods of suppressing black votes, but the voting process was set by the Constitution that was decided by wealthy white men.  They allowed only propertied men to vote.  Various political and economic factors forced an expansion to include all white men, black men, women and even lowered the voting age.  The wealthy white men are still trying to control who votes which hurts other whites.

In the 20th century many American cities built public swimming pools, but many whites objected against blacks being so close.  They tried various maneuvers to oust the unwanted blacks, but in many cases the swimming pools ended up being closed and filled in with dirt.  

Americans have had a few attempts to offer a public health program to provide health security for all its citizens, but early attempts were thwarted primarily by vested interests with racist strategies playing a role.  When finally Barrack Obama was able to implement such a plan, often referred to as Obamacare it was met with fierce opposition and it became evident that a racist strategy was a key.  The Democrats were forced to use a state by state implementation with southern States resisting, even refusing to accept federal money.  The tragic reality for the voters in these states was it would have benefited more whites than blacks, but of course everyone lost out.   Check:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/06/dying-of-whiteness.html

Unions have been a force for improving working conditions, but many kept blacks out, with the blessing of the white owners.  But when unions are unified they have more power.  

Climate Change is getting more attention, but again many whites were against efforts to deal with it, partly because wealthy whites had vested interests, but also because Obama crusaded for it.  When Trump got power he automatically tried to undo Obama's legacy.

Housing has historically been how most people develop wealth.   After many years of building equity in a house, the next generation starts off with an advantage.  Blacks were deliberately restricted in obtaining affordable housing.  They ended up living in the poorer parts of town which further limited educational opportunities.   

What can be done?  There are many informal efforts and some progress from natural relations, but there is need for faster actions. that only Government can provide. 

Reparations is a very touchy subject, but the author suggests one tool might be to allow blacks (who can be traced to enslaved ancestors) be given grants to help with down payments.  The mortgage interest deduction gives an advantage to those who have qualified for a mortgage, but it means everyone else is subsidizing it.   It will take at least a generation to give blacks a chance to accumulate wealth the way many whites have had for over a century.

Misinformation abounds as does fear.  CRT (Critical Race Theory) is actually greatly needed, as much for ignorant whites as for anyone and should be protected as free speech.  There has been a white view taught in American history.  One study showed that only 8% of high school students knew that slavery was a primary cause of the American Civil War.  Social media as been an effective platform for racists beliefs with one example being in June 2020 seven out of ten Facebook shared posts were anti Black Lives Matter.  One retort to Black Lives Matter was that "All Lives Matter" ignoring that in fact black lives had not really been acknowledged.

Education is mainly a state responsibility and in Canada it is controlled by the provinces.  The federal government can offer incentives and guidelines which although likely to be resisted need to be made as enticing as practical.  Eventually students will learn, but it will take at least a generation to be sufficient. 

Social media is a key element and there are concerns of censorship.  Hateful ignorant communication needs to be monitored and contested.  Legally there are limitations, but the government has a responsibility to promote truth.  

The Supreme Court nomination is happening and we have been promised a black woman, who will also have to be excellent.  Already critics are claiming the decision should not be based on demographics.  They over look that over 120 Supreme Court justices  have been, with the vast majority white men and no black women.  Of course demographics matter as everyone has a different perspective. 

The establishment always has the advantage over minorities, but as the minorities are gradually increasing in numbers their leverage will increase.

As a Canadian I have been smug looking at all the racial turmoil in the United States, however looking deeper we are not so different.  In fact it is human nature to emphasize the differences, but we do better when we focus on the similarities.

Better pay attention to China's role in the world

 While today's headlines revolve around the pandemic, other forces are gathering strength to affect our future.  China is not biding its time, but plotting to become the dominant nation on earth. This rant is inspired by Fareed Zakaria, but the ideas are being covered by many sources.  Experts included Evan Osmos and Ian Bremmer add their thoughts to make the point.

At one time the Chinese were self aware of their greatness.  They were the ones who innovated, they were the ones with the well developed scholarship perhaps even complacent about their role in the world.  However about the 16th century the West grew and exploited the Chinese.

Xi Jinping is the current ruler of China and has a firm grip.  What he wants is key.   Xi started his power as charming and interested in America.  He briefly studied farming at Muscatine, Iowa and took a tour of the U.S. including a Los Lakers basketball game with meeting Magic Johnson.  His only daughter studied English and psychology at Harvard under an alias.   

Xi had a tortuous history to achieve his current status.  His father was a key revolutionary, who when Mao Zedung felt he needed to revamp the Communist party, had Xi's father and many others arrested, forced Xi's mother to denounce her husband.  It has been rumored that a sister was hounded to suicide.  The young Xi was sent to manual labor and was rejected several times before allowed to join Communist party.  He worked his way through the ranks and along the way married a prominent singer.

Mao's successor Deng Xiaping took a different approach.  His underlying philosophy was to "Hide your strength... bide your time."  His goal was for China to get rich and powerful, without disturbing the then current global powers.  Each year China gained industrial power and we in the West got used to cheap goods.  Technology was literally stolen (on a personal level this affected me).  While our governments giving into voter demands found the Chinese willing to loan money at low interest rates.  Three of my pet retailer accounts were impacted by China:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/06/working-with-pet-retailers-part-2.html 

Successful (capitalist) entrepreneurs were encouraged.   The top example was Jack Ma, the founder of Alibaba in 1999  He reached global celebrity and was a flamboyant entertainer.   He was the most admired Chinese citizen.  He developed a new payment system and became mammoth online retailer.  In 2014 he offered the  largest IPO at New York stock exchange.

When Xi took power in 2012 he recognized he would need Jack Ma to launch his ambitious program to further boost Chinese power.  The Chinese by this time were innovators at Western levels.  Jack Ma had more celebrity status than Xi and Xi felt uncontrolled capitalism could lead to a collapse of China.  Ma had criticized restrictions publicly.  An IPO intended for the Shanghai stock exchange had been squashed.  Ma disappeared for several months and when made his appearance had become very subdued.

Xi's long range goal appears to be to toughen up the country and claim the dominant global position that China once held.  Censorship is one of his tools and he has determined to get rid of movies that accept same sex relationships and effeminate men.  He has censored video games, social media and has even forbidden anti government karoke music.  A very popular movie has been the "Rambo" like, action movies, "Wolf Warriors" that praise strong fighting heroes.   

An aging population has been identified as a key factor against future growth. In addition to worsening the pension system there were other problems with the one child policy which has been discarded.  Check:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2018/08/in-love-we-trust-is-movie-title-with.html 

He lost respect for America, especially due to their riots high lighted by the January 6th insurrection.   For public consumption Trump  has directed a lot of insults (including racial) and threats against the Chinese.  Trump's poorly thought out rants will only stiffen the resolve of the Chinese people.  They have withstood massive bombing from the Japanese and others.  When criticized for their policies Chinese politicians like to point to the racial history of the United States.

At the same time the Soviet Union collapse is frightening for XI . He attributes it to at least two factors.  One is the opening up to the West.  Another is the development of nationalist sentiments of many of the ethnic groups such as Lithuanians, Estonians and I would add Chechen.  

China itself suffered terrorist attack including ruthless car killings that by 2014 reached Tianamen Square.  The perpetrators were identified as Uigher.     The response was with massive surveillance including facial recognition equipment. Internment camps were set up with torture, abortions, sterilizations.  The Muslim religion and unique language were considered threats.  The Uighers were forced to speak Mandarin.  Xi felt diversity was a threat to the Chinese identity.

In the meantime there was a military buildup.  Still behind the Americans, but closing the gap.  

The Chinese have taken over Tibet and have threatened Westerners who harbor the Dalai Lama who is mostly revered.  In 1999 Britain handed Hong Kong to the Chinese government with the understanding Hong Kong would maintain some independence for decades, but the Xi administration has violated that with violent crackdowns on dissenters, independent politicians and journalists. 

 China grabbed a relatively small piece land from India after fighting.  It has symbolic value against those of us who would to see India as a counterpoint to China.   The border land has been seen to have military implications for both nations.  

To press claims in the oil rich South Seas China has created artificial islands.  This has led to more vigorous claims to their rights.  This has impinged upon Malaysia, Philippines, Vietnam and Indonesia.  This is both economic and military. 

 The biggest concern is threatening Taiwan.  Taiwan used to be part of China and the Xi Jinping government is demanding the return.  The Taiwanese government represents the remnant of Chiang Kai Chek's resistance to the Communist takeover.   It was authoritarian, but has since become a democratic nation.  Chinese battleships and jets are in Taiwan's area.  The Pentagon believes that China would win what may the inevitable battle.  This would force a lot of decisions around the globe and time is running out.

Diplomacy, has also been identified as a tool for Chinese domination.  They have long been accused of ignoring human rights issues with their national partners which by itself wins them influence.  In Asia they have been developing what they call a Silk Road connecting their neighbors with economic benefits for all parties.  They have support programs in Africa and South America.  Recently the Chinese have been noted for buying Iranian oil which has been forbidden by American sanctions.  Obviously the Iranians who have been spurned see it differently  A few years back Canada felt victimized when the Chinese demanded no extradition for a Chinese business woman when Americans wanted her for offenses against their sanctions.  The Chinese responded by locking up two Canadian business men for two years on phony charges.

What To Do?

It is argued the "free" world has been sleeping while China has been planning to dominate us for many decades.  In the meantime we all need to co-operate as we need everyone to fight against the pandemic and climate change.  Perhaps this effort which is also in China's interest could be a mitigating factor .  To be successful, transparency is essential for all of us to survive.  If China recognizes that they need to share information it could be a breakthrough.  However they might take a different view, not trusting us.

It is essential that America and its allies strengthen their democracy, pay attention to real problems like pandemics and climate change and inequality   I don't see it  --who has the willpower?  I do see ramping up military capabilities.  According to some reports Chinese students at all levels are outperforming Americans, indicating that most western democracies have not paid enough attention to education.

Recently Lithuania defied China and accepted a Taiwan embassy.  I am sure they will pay a price, but a bigger group would make sure China also pays a price.  China needs us not only as consumers, but also as suppliers. This is not much leverage today, but if we as a whole are wise it could become more of a factor, but time is against us.

We are a month away from the Bejing Winter Olympics.  Some nations have decided not to send a diplomatic contingent which will probably not have much impact.  Many athletes are not going becasuse of the pandemic and some are protesting the treatment of a Chinese tennis star.  The really big thing is that the International Olympic Committee selected for this most prestigious event.  Money speaks louder than words.  Personally I love the Olympic ideal and would like to believe it is good for world peace, but perhaps not if authoritarian nations can use it for propaganda.

We are not unified enough as too many people and entities do not appreciate that we are all connected. 

Can Mankind change in time?

 Most people would agree we live in a crazy world.  Many are worried that we are going in the wrong direction.  We haven't really handled the pandemic while climate change is accelerating.  A possible nuclear war has not been eliminated.  We are squabbling over all these issues.

Carl Sagan, searching for an extra terrestrial civilization with no result.  Many would think that meant we are the only ones in the universe, but another interpretation is that civilizations self destruct before they are able to communicate across the universe.  Carl was egotistical, but humbled.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2012/10/carl-sagan-and-our-future.html

What is intelligence?  If a being can differentiate between darkness and light or if a being can seek nutrition, is that the base for intelligence?  We know evolution moves with mutations that gradually take over from previous life forms.  Life started in its simplist form, but somehow over a long period of time elevated to Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein.  Recorded history is only a slice of earth history and infinitesimal against solar history.  Eternity is incomprehensible to humans

Individualism is growing and most of us prize the freedom that allowed it.  A good example might be with homosexuals.  Only a few decades ago in western countries it was a life and death matter.  It is still a life and death matter in much of the world, but homosexuals have emerged perhaps first in the arts, but also in politics and really in all fields of life.  We have always admired those individuals who successfully bucked the establishment.  There are many more voices that we need to pay attention to.  There is resistance to authoritarianism while elites have found ways to mobilize large crowds.  Other small groups see the dangers outlined below and although their voices are being heard they are not yet being heeded enough.

Evolution has been depicted as survival of the fittest and we have taken that to mean the strongest and the fastest.  More recently we have come to realize that group dynamics played a role.  Many hunts depended on a group.  Wars for that matter depended upon co-operation and trust among allies.  Finding better ways to survive requires the effort of many.  Consider:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2014/07/selected.html

There has been such a thing as tyranny of the majority that held back progress and human rights.  Another reality is that small wealthy elites have been able to manipulate the rest of us for their increasing greed.

The Covid 19 pandemic is really a health crisis.  While we have been complaining about the high cost of drugs and medical services, the pandemic is recognized as truly universal and there is no cost for vaccinations.  Some might argue that the drug companies are benefiting from the panic and are probably helping to fan it.  At the same time the rest of us are at the mercy of those who are resisting.  The resisters are often just afraid or lazy, but for others it is a political decision.

Climate change is no longer a theory, but is hurting millions around the globe.  Climate refugees are mingling with genuine political refugees.  What some might consider economic migrants are at least partially motivated by loss of opportunities due to climate change.  Economically, storms, floods and droughts have resulted in a loss of productivity.  Some very wealthy people are still trying squeeze as much profits as possible.  Other people fear for their jobs and economic security.

What has stopped nuclear war has been fear of MAD i.e. mutual assured destruction.  But many nations have the bombs and others are seeking them.  There are some who believe they can survive a nuclear war, others who believe if they bomb first they will win and there are others who don't care.  Should a mad man get control we are all in danger.  One must recall that Donald Trump had access to the bomb. 

Underlying all these crises is inequality.  It is possible inequality will be exacerbated, but it is also possible there will be a resetting of the status quo.  Check how inequality has been leveled in the past:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2020/01/the-great-leveler-violence-and.html

The crisis is human made including Climate, pollution, drugs, wars and pandemics.  The problems cannot be solved by any individual, but by a collective understanding and action.

Solutions??  

We are dealing with human nature which is ego centric.  We have separated ourselves through languages, racism, sexism, homophobia and countless other criteria.  Despite those limitations mankind could only have survived to this point as there was a part of everyone that cares for others. and we learned co-operation is necessary.

To me the greatest need is for education with some attention to critical thinking.  An earlier blog still explains the scope:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2011/11/education-and-our-future.html Education has been politicized and a budget bargaining item.  There are so many perspectives on it, but my hope is that more people will realize its critical importance for our group survival that barriers will fall and purse strings will loosen.  The more "rational" education the better we will all be.   http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2012/11/what-teachers-make-by-taylor-mali.html

I have only a crude understanding of Game Theory, but believe there may be some lessons to be learned.  The best results are when an individual chooses what is best for themselves and the group.  It depends on rationality.  Making the first move encourages others to take a risk.

Rationality boils down to enlightened self interest.  We can pull ourselves over top of others, but the best long term benefits come when everyone benefits.  As a salesman one mantra was the "win-win" solution.

Trust is sadly lacking in the world mainly because some people have put their interests above that of others.  However it is vital, so that without it we will let suspicions lead to fear which cuts off rational discussion.  Earlier blogs have tackled this issue.  One with lots of useful links is:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2020/05/trust-crucial-foundation-for-democrarcy.html

If no one makes the first move, nothing will get done.  Fortunately a few have made that first move.  Now it is your turn.

What to Make of Georgia and Trump's Last Days

As I write this I am half way through "A Promised Land" and wondering how Americans could put themselves through this current insanity after having Barrack Obama, a rational, thoughtful president.  Donald Trump is an egotistical con man, but he has served as a critical tool for conservative thinking, the kind that ensures inequality.  It appears the Democrats will eke out a slight power edge in Congress, but will still be subject to the randomness of insanity.

Georgian run offs apparently were instituted originally to discourage blacks.  I think they are a very good idea to stop splitting the opposition to allow a minority opinion to get elected.  50% +1 is more acceptable, considering that even a minority would recognize that the majority has been fairly decided.

Trump's infamous phone call may have had a slight, but critical impact.  There must have been some people who wanted to vote for the Republicans for different reasons, but were concerned about allowing criminal behavior to influence their election.  Others must have been outraged enough to make an extra effort to vote.

Watching the CNN coverage like many, it was exciting with the ups and downs, but after awhile you become conscious that we were being teased to keep us watching.  The results were already decided and were being slowly revealed.  Finally it turned out that Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock would be the two new senators.  The political outlook is much better than many feared it would be, but it is still frightening that so many would vote for the Trump ticket and the party that used him for their own ends. 

Joe Manchin has become a more powerful person as he is one Democrat that often votes with Republicans and can prevent the tie breaking vote of Kamala Harris.  For that matter any Democrat senator can be ill, called away on government business or respond to pressure so there are no guarantees that any particular legislation or appointees will be passed.  

Many Republicans are handling their disappointment disgracefully and Trump with blatant misinformation has encouraged rioting.  The rioters are a small number, but able to project their unhappiness.

Covid-19 has probably killed off some voters for the Georgian runoffs and younger voters have been added.  Most important was the chaotic management of the Trump team.  Although many did not believe it, it was demonstrated that masks and social distancing do save lives.  Trump set a very bad example and compounded it with bad decisions.  Probably a few voters changed their minds, but ignorant pride is hard to be rational.

After rejoicing for the Democrat triumph in Georgia it took only a few hours before more traitorous behavior.  Some Congressmen wanted to contest the election results from November 3, 2020.  Large numbers of rioters attacked the capital, resulting so far in four deaths.

Most of us clearly see Donald Trump was a BIG MISTAKE.  I would go further and say that Trump was a tool who in turn aroused hatred to transform into more tools.  It seems that the tools have gotten out of hand and this might hurt those who thought they had power.

Power has become concentrated, but it has also been challenged.  The core of power has been very wealthy,very greedy and short sighted mostly men who want such things as lower taxes and a reduction of regulations so they can enjoy even more wealth.  The taxes that serve everyone (including the very rich) and the regulations that protect everyone (including the very rich) are like red flags to some wealthy people.

These powerful men and women know full well that the majority want to be protected and want to be treated fairly so they have to find some way to attract their votes.  How to get people to vote against their best interests?

Perhaps the most emotional issue that steers voters is abortion.  Some powerful people hate abortion, but for most it is not the highest priority, but a useful tool.  No sane person likes the idea of abortion, but most feel it is very personal with many factors.  Originally abortion rules were not liberalized to encourage abortion, but in recognition that desperate women were dying and others becoming infertile.  We now realize that abortions limit unwanted babies that add stress to all society.  The Democrats have suggested and proved there are better ways to reduce abortions.  Sex education, accessibility to contraception, parental support and a poverty net have proven to be successful but usually resisted by those who hate abortions.  Having said all that we can respect those who feel abortion is their highest voting priority, but realistically they are not enough for the 1%.  Other religious concerns are also tapped into that generate political power.  Some church members (and others) are upset about gays gaining power.  Some feel that those who do not respect their religion should be forced to.

When Lyndon Baines Johnson passed civil rights laws he acknowledged that Republicans would gain power, he thought for at least 50 years.  Nixon and later Reagan found it was reasonably easy to lure former southern Democrats over to the Republican party.  Trump has used racial prejudices long before being elected.  In addition to the initial anti black feelings he lashed out at immigrant Mexicans and Muslims.  If we are all honest we are all prejudiced against outsiders, but increasingly modern Americans are living in harmony with different races and religions.  

Gun rights it turns out is another issue to overcome economic self interest.  Financial interests (gun and ammunition manufacturers) have opened up rights that have led to a high murder rate, a high suicide rate and intimidation.  In truth many feel frightened by violence and things they don't understand and feel they need protection.  But it has proved to be  a vicious cycle with some fanning fear.

There is another divide that has developed, rural and urban (suburban).  Many in rural areas have a different life style  Big industrial farming has made life very difficult for small farmers.  Although it is changing, educated people tend to go to the cities.  Some recognize this divide as critical to our politics.  A recent blog:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2020/10/what-about-those-hicks.html

The 1% have been frustrated that they had been limited in using their financial resources to get their way.   But after years of campaigning they had been able to get a more agreeable Supreme Court that finally opened the doors to let them use their finances.  Of course many thought the court was changing to further limit abortions.  Obviously that made advertising more available with loads of misinformation, but also data analysis to break down voters to find out how better to manipulate them. An earlier blog discussed  dark money:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2016/07/dark-money-by-jane-mayer.html

 I understand that the Koch Brothers were initially distrustful of Trump and were reluctant to lend their financial support, but some how they became convinced that Trump would better assure their agenda which was lower taxes and fewer regulations.  Others could foresee that the Supreme Court would finally get rid of abortions and curtail gay rights, that darker skinned immigrants would be kept out.  Gun rights likely to be retained and maybe expanded.  Blacks would be kept down.  Of course there is opposition and it is getting better organized.  Maybe the Republican agenda has gone too far and their tools have gone too much overboard or maybe they have gained a toehold.

Two forces that might eventually ameliorate the situation are education and campaign finance.   A significant  university course for me  was Prejudice and Discrimination.  One point was that it all starts with pride in whatever group you identify with and although that can be beneficial it also means that outside groups are somehow inferior.  From evolutionary survival traits we notice differences and they can be automatically frightening.  Educational content can help us better understand that differences can be more interesting than frightening and in fact widen our enjoyment of life.  As important as content is, the environment is equally important as contact as proven to lessen distrust.  Economic disparities make diverse contact more difficult.

The loosening of campaign finance has allowed those with wealth to promote their agenda more  effectively.  Facts can be slanted and with repetition gain credibility.  Opinions can be amplified.  In the heat of election it is very difficult to monitor the truth.   It might  be easier to limit spending or for the government to equally provide funding but the truth also has to be controlled or at last monitored.

An earlier blog that now seems accurate, but naive:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2017/07/trump-enablers.html

At this moment the future is a blur.  Trump could be a turning point towards more democracy or fascism.

Jared Diamond examines national crises--worth reading

Personal crises offer a key to understanding national crises.  There are important similarities and critical differences.  I found "Upheavel" to be the most rewarding read so far this year.

Jared identifies six countries that he has spent time in and that offered an historical crisis that allowed for useful analysis. 

"Findlandization" has been something derogatory but the author feels that it has been taken out of context.  Although they made many concessions to the Russians, they were able to maintain a liberal democracy and industrialize themselves effectively. 

Chile suffered a bloody coup in 1979 with some support from the United States.   I remember a very interesting movie "No" that explained the advertising campaign.  The initial problem was that 17 groups all wanted access to limited tv airtime.  An advertising executive (played by Gael Garcia Bernal) was able to present a unified message that worked to avoid a constitutional amendment that would have extended Pinochet's dictatorship.  One victim of the coup made his way to a newspaper I worked for, the Oakville Journal Record.  In Chile Alan Lathrop had been a reporter who once interviewed Charles De Gaulle.  He became the advertising manager and a friend of my boss. 

Indonesia  was the newest nation in the study and as a group of widespread islands with many languages did not initially have a national feeling, but has developed one since.  Jared recounts an early dictatorship and some mass killings.  I am reminded of another movie  "The Look of Silence" (2014) was a multi national effort regarding the genocide in the 1960's. This film would not be possible without careful political manoeuvring, luck and courage.  Originally  the director Joshua Oppenheimer, set out to talk with victims of the genocide, but circumstances encouraged them to talk to perpetrators.  Surprisingly they boasted of their deeds in front of their own relatives.  Adi Rukan a brother of one of the victims actually confronted many of the perpetrators.  Horrifying tales of killing "Communists" mutilating and drinking of blood.  Told very matter of factly.  The protagonist was an optometrist and actually tested some of the perpetrators and provided glasses.  Many of the perpetrators and their families either justified what was done or avoided responsibility with some boasting on camera.

Australia was originally colonized by convicts, then British citizens were allowed in an effort to keep it for British only.  Next they allowed in northern Europeans.  World War II helped them to start realizing they could not depend on mother Britain to prosper.  When the United Kingdom joined Europe in the formation of the European Common Market they were forced to give up Commonwealth trade arrangements.  At this point they began to realize their future was going to be tied more to Asia and the United States.  The author had visited when restaurants were bland with a few exceptions, but years later after immigration opened up a wider variety of cuisine.  Immigration from Asia and trade has increased to raise the standard of living for all Australians.

Jared analyzes Japan in two parts.  The first was after western traders forced themselves on Japan and it was realized they were powerless to stop the cultural invasion.  They decided to strengthen themselves by learning more of modern western technology by visiting Europe and America and accepting visitors.  Eventually they acquired enough power to defeat European powers in the early twentieth century.

They then became arrogant and thought they could take on the American military.  This ended in an humiliating catastrophe.  They were industrious and within a few decades were the second strongest economy in the world.  They are at a crossroads now.  The government carries an enormous debt, although most of it is to their own citizens and corporations.  They still are resented by China and South Korea due mainly to war time atrocities.  Jared contrast the Japanese response to their wartime defeat with Germany.  Germany has been more open and accepting responsibility to their own citizens.  Furthermore Jared cites a sincere apology from Willy Brandt who fell on his knees in contrition at what Germany had done in the war.  Japan has not done anything comparable.

Another contrast between Germany and Japan deals with their attitudes towards immigration.  Germany has accepted immigrants over the years, partly to maintain a vibrant work force.  During the recent Syrian crisis they accepted more refugees than any other country.  They are sure to have problems, but on the whole it will be good for Germany both economically and culturally.  Japan has always tried to maintain their racial purity and even today are reluctant to open up the gates.  It has been pointed out to me that Japan has opted for more reliance on robots to replace retired workers--a key factor behind my investment in Honda  contrast with Germany

United States has benefited from many advantages.  It has an inland water network that allows for cheap transportation and two coasts (actually 3 like Canada) that had protected them from invasion.
Immigration has enriched them economically and culturally.  Democracy has worked well for them, although decisions are slower, they tend to make better ones over time.

The Americans are also at a crisis point and many factors that could undermine them.  Number one is a diminishing willingness to compromise.  Politically many developments have led to polarization.  The expense of campaigns have forced politicians to spend more time fund raising than discussing issues with opponents while modern air travel has meant that many of their families stay back home with less social interchange with other congressional families.  Polarization extends to the general population that can now watch tv channels that reinforce their views.  Residential pattern and even martial choices are heavily influence by political affiliations.

Another factor is low voter turnover.  United States unlike other countries requires voters to be registered and opened opportunities to suppress undesired voters.  A large turnout gives greater credibility to the government.
 
The American government has less investment in education and infrastructure than other industrialized countries where teachers have higher standards, but also more pay and prestige.   Immigration has been a key strength of U.S. and is needed more than ever to maintain population and economic growth.  Immigration is a positive for such things as childcare and scientific innovation.

America has become arrogant disdaining the idea that they could learn from other nations.   The author surprised me by stating that America could learn lots from Canada and then Europe and then the rest of the world.  Under Donald Trump America has been disengaging from multi lateral organizations that in truth need to be strengthened for current and future crises.

In short, "...fundamental problems are polarization, voter turnout and obstacles to voter registration, inequality and declining social mobility and declining government investment and public goods."
 
Crises for the whole world.  One that the author worries most about is the danger of a nuclear conflict.  Jared itemizes four ways it could happen and that even with the Cold War over the danger is greater than ever.  With Trump backing out of existing agreements the dangers have increased further since this book's 2019 publication.  

Climate change is real.  Jared points out that all energy sources have disadvantages, but that global powers need to start moving away from fossil fuels.  He does make a case for nuclear power by accepting risks.  The real force needed is conservation pointing to Europe's attitude towards gas guzzling vehicles.  Cars and gas are taxed to discourage wasted fuels.

Another global crisis is the inevitable depletion of natural resources.  Some are finite while others such as forestry and fish are renewable, but poorly managed.  Although overpopulation is a factor, a bigger factor is that the well off countries consume about 32 times as much resources as the poor nations.  To compound the situation third world people are increasingly aware of the inequities.  Westerners sometimes picture the poor as a big "problem" instead of admitting the rich are the ones who created the problem. 

Government is disparaged by many who think they are corrupt or incompetent and should not be able to dictate our lives.  Jared points out that governments have been in existence for over 5,000 and were formed for two purposes:  1). to monopolize force to maintain peace and 2) to redistribute wealth for greater aims which could be to enrich the rich or for the greater good o society.  We need to keep those purposes in mind on a global framework.

Jared took 6 years for this book, but realizes the case studies are selective and not random.  He would like to see his studies expanded as we all need to better understand how crises can be better handled.  The book contains lots of easy to understand analysis with interesting personal observations.

RACISM--WE ARE ALL GUILTY

Prejudice simply means pre-judging.  We all note differences including non visible differences.  It is in our genes to make a quick assessment, otherwise we might be killed or raped or possibly helped.  We fear what we don't understand as the world is a dangerous place.  We feel safest and most comfortable among people most like ourselves.

In another blog I learned that the wisest people withhold judgment until they get more facts.    http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2016/10/the-wisest-one-in-room.html

But in order to survive a quick, even instantaneous decision is often required.  If we are wrong we could be dead.  However better decisions are more likely when one has more time.  It is normal for first impressions to stick until counter evidence is over whelming.   Abraham Lincoln is quoted as saying, "I don't like that man, I must get to know him better."  The first question after encountering something new should be "Why might my initial impression be wrong?"

We are each unique and capable of contributing to our society given a chance.  Society benefits when everyone is given that chance.  A chance actually starts before birth.  Are our parents treated fairly?  Stress and nutrition are factors while we are still in the womb.  After birth are we given an equal opportunity to learn including avoidance of unhealthy distractions?  Are decisions concerning our future made based on merit?  We likely will never achieve perfection, but should always push towards the goal.

Of course some of us are quicker to recognize opportunity and some realize preparation is critical.  As a collective we do not always realize we all benefit when choices are based on reason and not prejudice (or bias).  We need to respect and encourage individuals who can lead us to a better world but that includes everyone.

Politicians gain power by appealing to emotions.  They use that power to stay in power and expand conntrol.  Republicans have long known that the average American would not support their economic agenda and the only way to achieve power is to appeal to emotions by tying a social agenda. Donald Trump did a masterful job of projecting fear and assigning blame.  His simple solutions hurt many people and are counter productive but appeal to enough people to allow him to indulge in his own personal agenda (which nobody really understands).  Racism has proved to be very effective.

Lyndon Johnson once said, "If you can convince the lowest of white men he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket."  It is so frustrating for those who understand the economic agenda of the Republicans to see those who are getting hurt the most base their vote on social issues and non policy factors. 

When there are problems people look for simple solutions.  We live in a complicated world.  Automation is diminishing the need for manual labour and increasingly so for brain work.  The world is so connected that powerful people can more easily find the weak spots to exploit. We are reaching the limits of what the planet can provide.  Powerful people are in conflict.  There are no simple solutions to most of the serious problems and we need to resist those who offer them.

Ignorance is inescapable.  Education means learning and scraping away a portion of ignorance.  Intelligent people realize they can never know everything.  Education is not just an economic opportunity to be exploited, but critical tools we all need for a fulfilling life.

Homo Sapiens originated in Africa.  Skin was black to protect against the sun--when men moved to cooler climates with less sunlight they needed less melanin and gained advantages of Vitamin D.  In due time  there were many superficial changes in humans while the core remained the same.

What do "others" offer us?  A different perspective.  Uniqueness.  Potential.  Why do we close doors?  Familiarity fosters understanding, but true equality will go forward in uneven steps.  Education is only part of the solution, but a necessary part with many possible approaches.  Racism is an obstacle we all need to overcome if we are to solve the most critical of problems.

An earlier blog with another angle on another side of the refugee crisis with racial implications:   http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2018/01/the-brain-drain-fromshithole-countries.html    

A recent blog that discusses how racism actually costs lives:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/06/dying-of-whiteness.html

COLLUSION OR FRAUD

The Trump administration is on a victory tour, shouting they have been TOTALLY vindicated, although the Mueller Report has not been examined in public.  Trump, himself has already determined to obliterate more of Obama's legacy.  His policies are in major ways against the best interest of his voters.  To me it seems likely his supporters are either at least tolerant of racist views and/or are upset over progressive social freedoms.  If a lie is repeated enough it is believed.

My understanding of collusion is vague.  It has to be proved that there was a criminally coordinated effort to bring about a result.  Of course all successful election campaigns involve coordinated efforts, but if we like the end results the efforts are acceptable.  In the carefully worded summary it was concluded there was no collusion with the Russian government.  Michael Cohen had already pointed out that Trump didn't feel the need to be direct in order give direction.  The summary did concede that obstruction has neither been proved or disproved.  Apologists state that since there was nothing to hide there couldn't be any obstruction which of course is nonsense.

Like most people I am dependent on what is brought to my attention by media and reinforced by how other people react to it.  None of the points I will raise are new, but they have not been denied.  If they don't mount to the legal definition of collusion I would shift my focus to the charge of fraud.

Well after the election we were told that Trump had been negotiating for a Trump Tower in Moscow, even though it had been strongly denied.  He is entitled as a businessman who quite likely thought he wouldn't win the election to carry forward his business.  One major problem is the lie about it.  Nobody can be sure of what really happened, but it seems this effort might have been all the Russian government needed to get some concessions.  Obviously Russian authorities were aware of this multi million dollar transaction and could understand that perceptions of significant numbers of American voters would be negative.  After the official denials of Trump all they needed to do was threaten to reveal the truth.  Possibly they had other points to operate with.

Paul Manafort as a campaign manager (with a history of supporting Russian interests specifically against Ukraine that wants stronger relations with the West) gave polling data to an associate of Putin. There was no point to the effort if this information was not going to be used.  Apparently the Russians used several tactics and seemed to be aware of leveraging situations.  Efforts were made to switch Democrat inclined voters to third party choices.   That was by itself instrumental in shifting the Electoral College to Trump.  Naturally they amplified Trump's rhetoric and likely targeted it. 

This is not meant to be all inclusive of Trump's ties to Russia.  It could be argued that Trump was just duped by Putin.  Putin is very openly expanding Russian influence.  He strives against NATO, the EU as well as democracy in Venezuela and Syria.  Trump's behavior is definitely unusual and mostly supportive of Putin own grievances.  Trump's ego is oversized and to a great extent is admired by too many.

The Republicans have used tactics to diminish accusations and innuendo.  Commonly they deny and when caught, spin. As more facts come out it seems there were very significant contacts.   Many, but not all Conservatives are overlooking a great deal about Trump, but realize they have an opportunity to  do things mostly opposed by the population such as lower high end taxes, cut social programs, and in some cases tighten up and abolish abortions. 

The Washington Post took up the challenge of tracking the lies of Donald Trump.  It is such a large and growing number that most of us don't bother getting the exact number.  I plead guilty, but recall it is something over 8,000.  You could quarrel with the definitions used, but even Trump supporters concede he likes to lie, but it is all in a good cause.  In my humble (?) opinion these lies were not for a good cause, even for many who thought fervently they were.   Muslims, Mexicans, blacks and gays are not responsible for their lot in life.  The greed of the 1% and automation are much more serious.

Climate change is real and Trump has brushed it off with distortions and misinformation.  He lied to coal miners, but they wanted to believe him rather than Hilary Clinton who pushed for job retraining.

Tax cuts were supposed to benefit everyone, but the very wealthy gained the most in absolute terms.  The cuts most certainly didn't pay for themselves and in fact are already ramping up deficits that Republicans know will have negative effects.  They also suggest cuts to safety net benefits and government services will solve any deficit concerns.  The rich got their rewards.  An earlier blog on dark money explains http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2016/07/dark-money-by-jane-mayer.html

When someone has been conned they resist admitting it.  When someone is accused of unsavory motivations they deny it.  To most of us it is obvious Trump did not deserve to win and has been a very divisive and incompetent president who could lead to disaster of one type or another.

What can be done?  At the moment calmness is critical.  Avoid the Republican traps, while avoiding unnecessary concessions.  The Republicans under Trump are over reaching.  The more outrageous the Republicans efforts are the more likely they are to generate questions from those who have been lied to.  Unless they can gain public support enough that Republican politicians fear for themselves impeachment rhetoric should be curtailed.  The Mueller Report, if ever revealed in reasonable totality is likely to provide many points that will put Republicans on the defense, but may not be enough for immediate action.  That leaves the 2020 election.  The Democrats already have the policies that most Americans prefer on health care, abortion, infrastructure, gun control, etc. and importantly more credibility.

The Constitution is not serving the interests of the Americans.  Twice the Electoral College has delivered a problematic regime which will take decades to undo--thinking of the judiciary system and America's international reputation.  For many other nations there will be a fear that a subsequent administration can undermine whatever progress a new administration can offer..

One thought after hearing constant justifications for the 2nd Amendment is that something similar should be articulated for education.  Early on the American government without a national army realized they could be attacked when they were unprepared.  Some would argue the second amendment was enacted to protect the citizens against the government, but I contend more important was a concern for national defense.  Today it has been interpreted with help of lobbyists that Americans must have access to military level weaponry.

On the other hand what Americans need much more to preserve real democracy is education.  It seems conservatives are always ready to cut public education, especially perceived non job skills.  Not sure what concrete proposals should be included, but budgets and non political supervision are critical.  If the Americans prefer to believe Trump, the selfish, egotistical entertainer then it must be admitted they deserve him, but the rest of us (I am proud to be Canadian) don't deserve him.

Just a review of those who helped put Trump in position:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2017/07/trump-enablers.html

Amusing Ourselves To Death

"Amusing Ourselves To Death" originally written in 1985 by Neil Postman was given a 20th anniversary reprinting with a forward in part to justify its continued relevance.  In 1985 the computer was established, but in the next twenty years dramatically increased its power and since then there seem to have been new innovations almost on a daily basis.  If anything this book is more relevant in 2018..  Television is very often portrayed as the doom of mankind, although now there are more electronic devices.

The author's basic premise is that enslavement will come not from coercion, but pleasure.  George Orwell  with "1984" vs. Aldous Huxley with "Brave New World."   Orwell portrayed a future of coercion, fear, secret police and the butchering of language as the means to produce compliant slaves.  Huxley suggests enhanced pleasures such as drugs and sex would be more effective.  We in Canada and the United States look at totalitarian states and fear that will be our fate if we are not vigilant.  We are not looking out for being lulled into complacency.

For thousands of years communication was limited by the speed of humans traveling to and from one another.  Smoke signals, semaphore and pigeons under special circumstances may have been faster, but usually less comprehensive.  When the telegraph and Morse code came around it soon sped up wire service which made newspapers more up to date with faraway events.  In 1844 Associated Press was founded prompting David Thoreau to comment that "telegraphy made relevance irrelevant."

Reading was a key factor.  Thomas Paine"s Common Sense" sold 100,000 copies in two months.

Neil feels that television in replacing print media has snuck up on us and is weakening our resistance to being controlled.  A lot of people would agree that television is harmful, but Neil goes a little further.  Anything presented on television has to be entertaining and that is its main sin.  Neil thinks entertainment can be useful, but it should not be considered educational.

He gets right into Sesame Street and points out it encourages youngsters to love tv.  He feels that education should be a building process whereas Sesame Street lessons are complete in themselves.  Sequencing continuity is important, but not how Sesame Street works.  It is understandable that by being entertaining television avoids perplexity and the sheer drudgery of boring details.  In defense of television it can bring innovative approaches to difficulties.   Often it inspires youngsters (and even oldsters) to explore some topics in greater depth.  However I do agree that by making education entertaining it makes us a bit lazy

Postman contrasts this with past literate societies.  When we went from an oral culture to a print culture readers were encouraged to study in more depth.  Newspapers covered more issues, while television tends to focus on horse races (ie.election polls) and gaffes.

Religion has become big business on television.  To do so it has understand the need to be entertaining. But Postman thinks something has been lost.

Commercials appeal to the emotions more than reason.  Determine the real emotional desires of consumers and show how your product contributes to that.  Not so much with argument, but with visual images.  Thinking (really dead space) doesn't televise well.

He mentions the famous Lincoln -Douglas debates  in the 1850's that could last several hours requiring a long attention span. With just two men they lasted up to seven hours and many people listened to the entire event while others read accounts.  This required in depth knowledge

Ronald Reagan once said "Politics is like show business."  Walter Lippman had a different slant on that idea when he said , "There can be no liberty for a community which lacks the means to detect lies."

Neil Postman was in many ways predicting today.  With news that is more entertainment than an open honest discussion someone like Donald Trump becomes possible.  I admit as a bit of political junkie  I find politics full of entertainment.  Of course it is also deadly serious, but often victory falls to the most entertaining.  For more:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2017/02/politics-as-entertainment.html

Recently watched a debate for the Ontario Provincial Elections.  There were three candidates representing the majority of previous voters.  A fourth candidate, for the Green Party, was rejected because  he didn't get enough support to be included.  Not surprised as they had only allotted 1 1/2 hours and even without commercials that was not enough time to get much more than reflexive responses to predictable questions.  Even debates are entertainment rather than a tool to help make important decisions.

Neil doesn't feel there are much in the way of solutions other than to be aware of what television really offers.  Computers with massive amounts of information serve corporate interests more than the common man.  Bottom line might be we should pay more attention to "Brave New World" than we have to "1984".

TRUMP ENABLERS

We can rant all we want about Donald Trump's misdeeds, but somehow he got into power.  An increasing majority of American voters now realize a horrible mistake was made.  Can we go forward somehow?  The problem is, the status quo suits some people.  In my head there are a number of enablers who bear responsibility.

Number One:  The electoral college.  You might think this is trivial or something that can't be changed.  The origin of the electoral college goes back to the Constitution negotiations.  The southern colonies (especially the elite) that owed their economic wealth to slavery were very concerned they would be out voted and were able to obtain some protections.  Even though they thought Africans were sub human they were able to insist that a slave was worth 3/5 of a human which enabled them to build up their population base.  This was eventually discarded, but the electoral college has been maintained.  It assures that small states can have disproportionate power in presidential elections.  In cold hard facts Hillary Clinton won almost an extra 3 million votes than Donald Trump and she never contested the electoral college.  Obviously if you want to win you have to play by the rules and the Trump camp took advantage of the rules.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2016/12/the-half-has-never-been-told.html  The rules need to be changed.  Remember George W. Bush lost the popular vote, but was able to win the electoral college.

The Media that is now mostly upset played a significant role. Trump knows show business and attracted a notoriety that greatly boosted his platform.  As always the media was more interested in their own ratings than discussing the issues and the credibility of the candidates.  Climate change should have been a much higher profile issue, but the media mostly ignored it.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2017/02/trump-and-media-or-media-and-us.html

The evidence is piling up that not only did the Russians want Trump to win, but were deeply involved.  Hillary Clinton had been critical of a recent Russian election and honestly earned the scorn of Vladimir Putin.  Trump has in the past been helped by Russian mobsters.  The Republicans had their own motives, as usual taxes and regulations that were very concerning to the 1%.  They knew that a social agenda would help draw in evangelicals and many low education voters willing to vote against their economic self interest.  It is hard to keep up to date, but read the link for a good perspective on Russian activities.  https://www.juancole.com/2017/07/trumps-russian-akhmetshin.html

The education system is uneven with many parts of the country investing more than others.  It seems ironic that Trump did best with the low education voters.  At the same time many of the wealthier better educated voted for their economic self interest.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2014/02/reign-of-error-what-direction-should.html

Big money was not only able to contribute massive amounts of money for their interests, but because of laws passed by conservatives and supported by conservative elements in the Supreme Court, could keep much of it secret.  Elections should not be decided or influenced by big money.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2016/07/dark-money-by-jane-mayer.html  The big and dark money enabled gerrymandering that ensures Republican congress members fear their home base more than the Democrat opposition.

Ultimately the voters.  Did they really think Donald Trump was going to represent their interests?  Did they think he understood the complexities of the modern world?  Did they feel putting such an immoral man in charge of their nation was ok, because he would somehow do the "right" thing?  Unfortunately, despite losing the popular vote the Trump agenda will get its chance to set the country back and maybe much worse.http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2016/06/the-american-iq-test.html

Democracy allows one to get what one voted for.  Some hope that after this experience the voters will wake up and vote more reasonably.  Hopefully they are right.

The photo is of a non voter, Sabre, but I like him much more than the enablers.

HATRED AND FEAR ARE ENDANGERING CIVILIZATION

Terrorism as a symptom should concern us all.  Of course by itself it is frightening, but underlying it is a greater danger to us all.  The actual number of deaths directly attributable to terrorism is really a very small percentage of humanity but it and the response to it indicates something worse.

The current focus is on Muslim extremists (who are only one of many terrorist groups), but the response from Westerners is emotional.  Terror is meant to frighten and is used primarily when other methods do not succeed.  In many ways they are winning by provoking us to change our daily habits and react like frightened animals.  Someone failed to set off a shoe bomb and it is now common to take off your shoes before getting on a plane.  More importantly it has caused us to point our fingers in a much wider swing taking in people who wish us no harm.

The problem is really more basic than real and imagined grievances of a very small group of people.  The most basic cause is inequality that is not really linked directly to the hatred that is being expressed.

There is the matter of wealth which is concentrating in fewer and fewer hands.  There is the matter of young people being held back.  There is the matter of minorities who in a world of increasing communication find themselves second class.  Resentment comes out in different ways, but almost always involves blaming someone else for life's frustrations.  Sometimes it is fairly direct, but too often it is misdirected.

ISIS apparently is happy to recruit young people who are not knowledgeable about their own religion, but feel a sense of grievance and a desire for meaning and/or excitement.  It is depressing to think of the many ruined lives.  It is also upsetting how others have let their own frustrations and fears be misdirected.  The terrorists want us help them unite other Muslims who are trying to fit in to a new culture.

The primary beneficiaries of this misdirected hate and fear are the terrorist recruiters and political opportunists.

What can be done?  An individual has limited power, but they often underestimate what they can do.  We set an example and encourage others to change their attitude.

First acknowledge there are underlying grievances.  When Westerners realized cheap oil was concentrated in Muslim controlled countries they bolstered the control of "friends" who enriched themselves while suppressing their own citizens.  Perhaps a greater concern would be they felt it was in their best interests to keep their people ignorant except for the elite.

Western countries were horrified with the Holocaust, but at the same time many restricted emigrating Jews.  We agreed to let them set up their own state in Israel, but somehow never got around to letting the Palestinians who were already there to also gain a state.  There is still discrimination against Jews, that all too often reaches violent levels in some parts of the world and Jews take comfort that there is one sanctuary where they can be safe.  They feel frightened by the surrounding Arabs and a mutual hate/fear cycle has set in.  In one sense they have to settle their concerns amongst themselves, but we should be careful to be neutral yet encouraging understanding.

Unfortunately in the United States especially, people have taken sides, not so much average voters as  those in power.  Much more financial and U.N. veto power is exercised on behalf of Israel than on the plight of displaced Arabs.  Some individuals have organized to boycott Israel, somewhat comparable to similar efforts to confront South African apartheid, but this has been met with political resistance. Many state governments are threatening to cut off support to any group that supports an Israeli boycott.

By itself a Palestinian political resolution will not stop terrorism, but it will undercut a very significant driving force.  Are there are other grievances?  Yes, but now perhaps the greatest is how too many of our fellow Westerners treat our new Muslim neighbors and talk about those still in the Mid East.  We fear the refugees fleeing violence and make it more difficult than it needs to be.  There is no escaping that we will all have to make adjustments.  We need to acknowledge the world is changing and has many other threats that we can only solve through co-operation.

Education is vital.  We cannot afford to be ignorant.  We cannot afford for others to be ignorant either.  The poor in many countries are limited in education options.  We need to learn about others and they need to learn about us.

Inequality is the real cause.  Those in power want to stay in power, while others are angling for ways to upset the status quo.  Appealing to  prejudice works.  Blaming the "other" relieves pressure from those who are benefiting from inequality.  How can someone earn over $20 million dollars and only pay 14% tax.  Someone is helping to pick up the slack.

As an individual one of the most important things to do is ask questions.  Why do you think that?  How did we get to this situation?   Can we resolve our differences?  Or tolerate them?
There are already assumptions as answers, but they seldom suffice in most situations.

TOLERANCE IS NEEDED FOR SURVIVAL

It seems every day there are examples of hate presented in the news.  Most recently we have the Orlando gay bar massacre.  Debates have picked up with emphasis on terrorism, gun control and also hate crimes. The real problem comes down to human nature and there are no easy ways of dealing with it.

It is human nature to identify with a group, starting with a small one (nuclear family) and then expanding.  We have not yet expanded to all humans in our group identity, but we have come a long way painfully.

Back in university when I was a little more idealistic I chose sociology as my major and was attracted to a course in Prejudice and Discrimination.  Professor Hadwen had a strong influence on my thinking, not only by the content of his presentations, but also the method.  The first time I encountered the idea of role playing where he would get students to act out a wide variety of views and then take reverse role as one way of understanding an opposing view.  One concept I learned was that prejudice starts with pride.  We take pride in belonging to our group which leads us to thinking those outside our group are inferior in some way and not totally trustworthy.

For a term project worth at least 50% of our mark he asked us to write about one of our own prejudices.  I thought I was prejudice free, but looking for something unique set on "older people."  At the time I had two Grandmothers who were very special to me as I had spent a big part of  my life living with them. Now, I can easily be described as an older person and have to examine my prejudice against younger people.  I could see a societal prejudice, but deep inside I could see I had it as well.  The research and study opened my eyes.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2020/12/two-grandmothers.html

In another of Dr Hadwen's classes a bureaucratic screwup had an effect on me.   I had written an essay I was very proud of and felt confident should get a good mark, but back home after exams my final grades were mailed and I saw a very bad mark.  I decided to switch majors, but next fall when I got the essay back the mark on it was very good.  Dr Hadwen apologized and gave me one of my favorite compliments, "You have a sociological mind."  Another semester I switched back.

But still found I was not as prejudice free as I liked to project.

My wife's best friend's parents owned a company that employed an openly gay person.  Even after many years of knowing this (and many other changes) I had never met him.  However my wife and her friend had developed a friendship that eventually resulted in an invitation to an open party and I was included.  I felt a bit uncomfortable, but agreed. I noticed that none of the other husbands in our group attended, but in the end I am glad I agreed.  First I was pleased that in most ways they were not that different.  I saw that gays could mix with non gays.  They came from a wide variety of backgrounds.  I wouldn't have known they were gay if I had met them in different circumstances.

Jared Diamond in his travels as an ornithologist spent a lot of time in Borneo working amongst a variety of what we would call primitive people.  At one point he acknowledged that their intelligence level is truly equal to ours, but he observed a few significant differences.  One was that they were distrustful of strangers and were very careful in their presence.  Jared contrasted this with how in big cities we walk by hundreds of strangers without very much concern.  Obviously this almost blind trust is one reason our civilization has advanced in so many ways.  He found that primitive people were superior at mediating differences with a preference to restoring relationships over property (or revenge).  Read more here;  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2013/06/jared-diamond-expanding-our.html

As a liberal minded person I looked down upon the simple minded conservatives.  "The Righteous Mind" by Jonathan Haidt made me realize I still have prejudices.  He explained that evolution favored individuals who fit into groups.  Religion was important, not just for content, but also as a set of commonalities for all members.  The idea of fairness means different things:  to liberals it signifies an equal chance for everyone, but for conservatives it means rewards should go to those who do the most or best work.  He feels a balance is needed between liberals, conservatives and libertarians.  Read more:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2013/02/the-righteous-mind.html

At a Human Library encounter I met a well known author who reminded me of a previous racial prejudice.  Working with young children and their families as the main part of my newspaper circulation job I encountered a wide variety of ethnic backgrounds.  For the most part I looked at that aspect as a discovery of interesting details that had a positive impact on my life.   However I had a number of less positive experiences with one particular group of people and will admit that when encountering other members of that group I did pre-judge.  I was shocked later to learn a good friend from university was of that same group, as I had thought he came from a different background.  The author who had a similar background chastised me (gently).

Another prejudice I shared with others unconsciously was against what might be considered lazy people or pleasure seekers.  I saw work, or at least activity as the point of life.  I never actually read "In praise of Idleness" by Bertrand Russell but just the title and a few references deepened my appreciation that there is more to life than work and those who are able to enjoy life are closer to the ideal than those who indulge in activity that they don't necessarily enjoy.

How many of you have had a prejudice changed by getting to know another person?  How many of us can identify our prejudices?

Individuals around the globe are gradually becoming aware that we live among billions, of people most of whom speak different languages, have different beliefs and customs.  But we also have much in common:  fear, greed, love, hate.  Our deepest concerns are very similar:  getting a job, getting a mate, surviving, protecting our children.  The inter-net has opened up new pathways of understanding (as well as misunderstanding)

The earth is like one big island and we are gradually becoming aware of our inter connectedness.  Working as a global team we can solve problems that are exacerbated with our individual selfish efforts.

History is full of examples of minorities, despite discrimination making significant contributions that made life better for the rest of us.  Minorities are really just a sub group, an additional identity of the one big family we all belong to.

Just another example.  Saudi Arabia recently executed 47 "terrorists" and amongst them was a Shi'ite cleric who advocated peaceful protest.  My perception is that Saudi Arabia is one of the least tolerant nations in the world.   Perhaps my judgment based on decisions of an elite group has prejudiced me against all Saudi Arabians.

Democracy works as rule by the majority and if done fairly it is expected that those who did not vote that way would at least accept and respect the view of the majority.  We are actually often advanced by the views of the minority who saw or understood something the rest of us didn't.  So along with majority rule, democracy requires minority rights.

The law can really only stay a little ahead of customs.  You can make women, blacks, Muslims, homosexuals and transgenders equal in law, but it is much more difficult to find total acceptance.

Cultural exchanges are a great idea, but they are expensive for the large masses of population.  Education also seems expensive to some, but in reality is a great investment.  Content is very important, but subject to debate.  We should encourage more input from more groups.  Integrated classrooms have proved to make a difference.  Recently I read a comment regarding the television series "Roots" which in an" entertaining" way made whites better understand what blacks had to endure.

We need to be aware of our commonalities.  We share a planet that is facing a variety of crises.  We have not yet escaped the possibility of nuclear annihilation.  Pollution is poisoning life everywhere.   Automation could be an opportunity for everyone or an instrument for extreme inequality.  Climate change is happening despite obstructionist denials and will determine our survival.

If we could all agree that would be nice, but way too big a step and perhaps a bit boring.  Can we learn to tolerate the differences we have or do we prefer to fight over them?