The Casual Blog

Tag: transgender

Visiting Yosemite, and some thoughts on lies in America

Last week I visited Yosemite National Park, which had resplendent fall colors beneath its towering granite peaks. There I was part of a photography group led by Gary Hart.  Gary was the nicest guy, and he did a great job directing us to some beautiful places and helping us improve our work.  Then I went by myself to Sequoia National Park and Kings Canyon to see the giant sequoia trees and mountain vistas.  The pictures here are a few of the ones I liked.  

My flight from Los Angeles to Raleigh was a red eye that arrived the morning of election day.  I was tired and jet lagged, and underprepared for the election of Trump.  I’d done some phone-bank work for Harris, and managed to convince myself that most likely she would win.  But, of course, she didn’t.  It was a painful disappointment.

The pain is still raw, but I’m trying to be mindful and curious as to how a majority of American voters could have decided that Trump was the better choice.  The pundits I’ve been reading and hearing have various theories, and no doubt there are many factors at play.  But so far I haven’t heard much about what looks to me like the most important one.

There seems to be general agreement that a big part of the Trump success was serious dissatisfaction with the current establishment.  The price of groceries, gas, and housing made people unhappy.  It wasn’t surprising that people wanted those problems addressed.

But why would anyone think that Trump would be the guy to do it?  His prior handling of the economy and other real world problems was erratic and inept.  His policy statements in this campaign were either extremely vague or kooky.  His mental capacity, never great, showed signs of major deterioration.  He was not only untrustworthy; he was constantly and shamelessly dishonest.  

Amazingly, though, Trump’s shameless dishonesty accounted for much of his success. His lack of any sense of shame made him immune to criticism, and willing to lie on a massive scale that overwhelmed all efforts at rational thought.  

Of course, some people felt insecure and frustrated about their economic circumstances.  But Trump managed to turn those understandable feelings into fear and rage.  He relentlessly presented the message that America was a hellscape of economic failure and crime.  Just as relentlessly, he blamed those supposed problems on invading immigrants, whom he characterized as criminals and rapists.  

This was all a preposterous lie.  Crime rates are down from the Trump years, and the economy has by most measures improved.  Immigrants are not invading en masse, and those who are here are more law-abiding than the native born.  Indeed, immigrants are a big part of our economic success story, and that has been true throughout our history.  

So how did the lie work?  Most of us are suspicious of those who look and sound different from us.  Our natural suspicion as to differences in skin color, language, and customs is usually manageable.  After all, we live in a multi-racial, multi-cultural society which in many regards works well.  But Trump stoked normal anxieties into a raging fire of  xenophobia and racism, and proposed a wonderfully simple solution to all those unpleasant feelings – get rid of the scapegoats.

This was certainly not a new idea.  Through the last five hundred years, Jews have been treated as scapegoats by various demagogues.  And of course, various other out groups have been treated as sacrificial victims to solve political problems.  

Indeed, Trump made clear enough that immigrants were not his only scapegoats.  There were scapegoats to fit with a potpourri of resentments and prejudices:  people of color, Jews, Muslims, women, gays, journalists, scientists, lawyers, teachers, liberals, government bureaucrats, and anyone who opposed him were attacked directly or indirectly as enemies of the state.  

Possibly the saddest and most ridiculous scapegoating was on our tiny minority of trans people.  Could anyone actually believe that trans folks were a serious threat?  The Trump people clearly thought so, since they spent many millions of dollars on anti-trans political advertising.  Watching those ads playing over and over, I assumed that most people would see through them as cruel and absurd.  I’m afraid, though, that a lot of people didn’t.  

We live in an age of misinformation that we haven’t yet understood how to correct for.  A great many of our traditional newspapers are no longer in business.  Right-wing media, such as Fox News, the Sinclair Broadcast Group, certain podcasts, and talk radio in the vein of Rush Limbaugh have become the primary news sources for many.  By and large, they amplify Trumpist lies and stay silent as to the truth.

At the same time, social media such as Twitter/X, TikTok, and Facebook are virulent sources of conspiracy theories and confusion.  Traditional, fact-based journalism has a hard time competing.  It’s hard for unwelcome truths to compete with exciting lies.  

Trump’s people appear to have grasped the value of these new opportunities for spreading big lies.  They also learned from twentieth century fascist movements that even obvious and transparent lies may come to be seen as true if repeated often enough.  

To begin to address Trumpism, we can start by calling out the big lies, rather than pretending that all this is normal and acceptable.  It was disheartening that the Harris campaign failed to do this with Trump’s dystopian immigration narrative, and instead adopted a dialed down version of that narrative.  Perhaps they concluded that correcting that scapegoat narrative couldn’t be done in the short time before the election.  In any case, there’s no doubt that it would have been difficult.  Big lies are powerful.   

Now we’ve got a large population infected with the culture of Trumpian lies.  They view actual journalism as fake news, and Trump opponents as Satanist pedophiles.  Arguing with them probably won’t help.  We can and should give them respect, compassion, and kindness.  We should gently and gradually reassure them that we are not Satanists or pedophiles.  Will that, plus measured doses of actual truth, be enough?  

We won’t know for a while.  Given that Trump lies about everything, it’s possible he won’t follow through on his deportation program, locking up his enemies, and the other Project 2025 ideas that would likely crash the economy and cause enormous misery.  If he does, it’s nearly certain that MAGA folks will experience bitter disillusion and massive voters’ remorse.  Perhaps a new and better politics will emerge from the ashes.   

A big spin, an op ed on free speech, Korean death fans, the unbelievable Donald, and what to say about Hiroshima

Tiller7Bug 1-3
Work bled over into Saturday, so I didn’t get outside for a photo-walk (these photos are from last week), but I did do an early spin class at Flywheel.All of my previous Flywheel spins there were 45 minutes, but this one was a full hour. I had some concerns that that extra quarter-hour could cause problems (such as woofing, or death), but I survived. Final score: 398. Finishing position: number one. Endorphins: plenty.

This week the Raleigh News & Observer and the Charlotte Observer published the op ed piece I co-authored with Michael Gerhardt about HB2 and the First Amendment. The thesis was that legislators who threaten retaliation for those who speak out against the transgender bathroom bill are chilling free speech guaranteed by the Constitution, and that should not be tolerated.

After I’d noticed the issue and decided it was serious, I reached out to Michael, a UNC Law professor and constitutional law expert, to see if he concurred in my analysis, and he suggested we collaborate on the piece. It was fun working together, and I got a kid-like thrill when the piece went live and people started posting reactions.
Tiller7Bug 1-4

Speaking of little newspaper pieces, there was a fascinating one in the NY Times this week about South Koreans’ fear of electric fans. South Koreans, a notably hard-working, sophisticated, tech-savvy people believe that sleeping with an electric fan blowing in the room can result in death. Fans are sold with special sleep timers. There are government warnings and media reports of fan deaths. Apparently this fear doesn’t exist outside South Korea.

We might once have thought it almost impossible for a large population to adopt an idea so comically loony, but no more. For example, right here in the USA, there are those who deny the fundamental facts of climate change or the need to do anything about it, including Donald Trump. And there is the stranger-than-truth story of Donald Trump, as of this week the official presumptive nominee of the Republican Party for president.

How could any significant number of people believe this man would make a good leader — of anything? How could anyone watch him for five minutes and fail to notice that he’s ignorant, crass, and shallow? How could large groups of people ignore the florid delusions and the almost non-stop lying, big lies, lies so blatant and transparent that they they seem proudly designed to be understood to be lies? Or the bullying, mean-spirited nastiness?

I’m not saying he’s all bad, mind you. At time he’s funny, and every now and again he says something that is not crazy. But it would be madness to entrust this guy with responsibility for addressing climate change, preventing nuclear war, or for cleaning up after himself, which is to say, any significant or insignificant responsibility. I continue to think that he will lose in a landslide that sweeps out a lot of other worse-than-useless pols. But even in that case, we’ll still have the not-so-funny, puzzling, and fairly disturbing reality that millions of our fellow citizens do not think the Donald is a contemptible joke.
Tiller7Bug 1-2

What would Trump say at Hiroshima? One shudders to think. This was clearly a problem this week for President Obama, a person in many ways Trump’s opposite. Let’s say you have sufficient moral capacity to understand it was horribly wrong to do a demo of the first atomic bomb by killing 140,000 civilians. Yet it would roil diplomatic alliances and certain important constituencies to apologize for this atrocity. So Obama, ever brilliant, delivered the most apologetic non-apology imaginable. He highlighted the horror, hugged victims, and called for movement towards a world without nuclear weapons.

His speech was in places Lincolnesque – moving, stirring, and inspiring — though also in places oddly ambiguous, disjointed, and restrained. Here are some of the good parts:

Why do we come to this place, to Hiroshima? We come to ponder a terrible force unleashed in a not-so-distant past. We come to mourn the dead, including over 100,000 Japanese men, women and children, thousands of Koreans, a dozen Americans held prisoner. Their souls speak to us. They ask us to look inward, to take stock of who we are and what we might become. . . .

Hiroshima teaches this truth. Technological progress without equivalent progress in human institutions can doom us. The scientific revolution that led to the splitting of an atom requires a moral revolution as well.

That I why we come to this place. We stand here in the middle of this city and force ourselves to imagine the moment the bomb fell. We force ourselves to feel the dread of children confused by what they see. We listen to a silent cry. . . .

Mere words cannot give voice to such suffering. But we have a shared responsibility to look directly into the eye of history and ask what we must do differently to curb such suffering again. . . . The memory of the morning of Aug. 6, 1945 must never fade. That memory allows us to fight complacency. It fuels our moral imagination. It allows us to change. . . .

Among those nations like my own that hold nuclear stockpiles, we must have the courage to escape the logic of fear and pursue a world without them. We may not realize this goal in my lifetime, but persistent effort can roll back the possibility of catastrophe. We can chart a course that leads to the destruction of these stockpiles. . . .

It’s clear that Obama understands the enormity of the nuclear peril, including the risk that our gigantic stockpile of nuclear weapons could end up destroying most every living thing on the planet including us. He’s repeatedly called attention to this existential risk. But he hasn’t made much progress in actually reducing it.

There are, of course, powerful institutional forces supporting the status quo of standing on the nuclear precipice – the military-industrial complex, now much more powerful than when President Eisenhower named it, and the fearful conservative mind set that exaggerates possible threats and reflexively resists reform. What if Obama just ordered destruction of half of our nukes? Would the missile officers refuse the order? Would there be impeachment proceedings, or a coup?

I doubt it, but there’s something that holds him back. Anyhow, he has made a judgment that he needs to change minds to prepare the way for a changed reality, and perhaps his speech will help with that.
Tiller7Bug 1