Category Archives: Death of Truth

A Crusade of lies against the Clintons

Rush Limbaugh was very popular among the American right, particularly in rural America. But Limbaugh was not a sterling example of a man with good character.

On the David Lettermen television show Rush Limbaugh attacked the Clintons as he always did but he even attacked their daughter Chelsea who was only 12 years old. He made a joke by comparing her unfavorably to the family dog. Nothing was too low for Limbaugh, particularly when attacking liberals. No tactics are off the table in a religious war.

He attacked them bitterly over the death of Vince Foster.  He said on his show that a Washington consulting firm was about to publish a story that Vince Foster was murdered in an apartment owned by Hillary Clinton! Foster was a childhood friend of Bill Clinton and joined the White House administration as counsel and was involved in scandals that in hindsight were pretty minor.  Nothing compared to the later Trump administration scandals. Foster was depressed, anxious and over worked. His death was investigated by 2 police agencies, a coroner, 2 independent counsels, and 2 Congressional Committees. All said his death was a suicide. But all this was nothing beside the fax that was sent to Rush Limbaugh.  The implication of the fax was clear—Clintons were murderers!  This brought polarization into American politics at a whole new level of extremism.  And Limbaugh was proud of his efforts.

Of course, there were many right-wing conspiracies about Foster. One of those was that Foster was assassinated to keep him from testifying against the Clintons. Or that he had been blackmailed by Israel over a secret Swiss bank account. Or that his death was the consequence of a secret tryst with—you got it—Hillary Clinton. Who else? Once more there was no evidence to support this. It was all lies manufactured somewhere on the right where these things are spawned. (and I am not denying that there have been lies on the left as well) But they have really found a congenial home on the right.

Rush Limbaugh helped embed conspiracy theories permanently inside the Republican party. Conspiracies were there to stay. They are still there in abundance. He had gone a long way toward convincing American conservatives that their president and a future presidential candidate were murderers who would stop at nothing to get their political way.  This was a religious crusade. And religious crusades always end badly and don’t allow truth to get in their way.

The crusade against the Clintons has been a remarkable phenomenon in American politics for about 2 decades.  And it is not ending any time soon.  Crusades can do that. American right-wing talk radio has been a big part of that.  Now I do not claim the Clinton’s were entirely innocent political actors.  I am saying though that they have been the object of an unprecedented massive campaign of lies that has been building for decades. Such a mountain of lies would be difficult for a saint to overcome, and for the Clintons it was impossible.

Many of us did not appreciate this when Hillary ran for the presidency in 2016. No matter how absurd, the lies accumulated and had tremendous effect.  After all, how could she combat a campaign that painted her as the leader of a cabal of pedophiles operating out of the non-existent  basement of a pizza restaurant basement in Washington D.C.?  No possible evidence could refute such a massive lie.

Rush Limbaugh played an important role in manufacturing, spreading, and solidifying this campaign of lies.

As Justin Ling said in his podcast series on CBC “The Flamethrowers”,

“The conspiracy theory was here to stay, thanks in large part to Rush Limbaugh. No longer were the Clintons conventional political villains. They were murderers! But whether or not the Vince Foster story really took hold in the minds of Limbaugh, he was leading a political crusade—and he was winning.”

 

 

The result was what one political commentator called “a seismic shift to the right tonight in American political thinking. It is measuring 10.0 on the political Richter scale.” It was massive; it was powerful; and it was created by Rush Limbaugh and his revolutionary cabal of right-wing radio commentators around the country.

It was intensely visible in 1998 in the American mid-term elections. The Republicans took control of the House of Representatives for the first time since 1954. They picked up 54 seats in the House and enough seats to claim the Senate as well. It was the worst loss suffered by a sitting President in 50 years.

There was one clear lesson from all of this: Conspiracy theories work.

And the Republicans did not forget that lesson then, and have not forgotten it since.

A Crusade of lies against the Clintons


 

On the David Lettermen show Rush Limbaugh attacked the Clintons as he always did but he even attacked their daughter Chelsea who was only 12 years old. He made a joke by comparing her unfavorably to the family dog. Nothing was too low for Limbaugh, particularly when attacking liberals.

He attacked them bitterly over the death of Vince Foster.  He said on his show that a Washington consulting firm was about to publish a story that Vince Foster was murdered in an apartment owned by Hillary Clinton! Foster was a childhood friend of Bill Clinton and joined the White House administration as counsel and was involved in scandals that in hindsight were pretty minor.  Nothing compared to the later Trump administration scandals. Foster was depressed, anxious and over worked. His death was investigated by 2 police agencies, a coroner, 2 independent counsels, and 2 Congressional Committees. All said his death was a suicide. But all this was nothing beside the fax that was sent to Rush Limbaugh.  The implication was clear—Clintons were murderers!  This brought polarization into American politics at a whole new level of extremism.  And Limbaugh was proud of his efforts.

Of course, there were many right-wing conspiracies about Foster. One of those was that Foster was assassinated to keep him from testifying against the Clintons. Or that he had been blackmailed by Israel over a secret Swiss bank account. Or that his death was the consequence of a secret tryst with—you got it—Hillary Clinton. Who else? Once more there was no evidence to support this. It was all lies manufactured somewhere on the right where these things are spawned. (and I am not denying that there have been lies on the left as well)

Rush Limbaugh helped embed conspiracy theories permanently inside the Republican party. Conspiracies were there to stay. They are still there in abundance. And he had gone a long way toward convincing American conservatives that their president and a future presidential candidate were murderers who would stop at nothing to get their political way.  This was a religious crusade. And religious crusades always end badly.

The crusade against the Clintons has been a remarkable phenomenon in American politics for about 2 decades.  And it is not ending any time soon.  Crusades can do that. American right-wing talk radio has been a big part of that.  Now I do not claim the Clinton’s were entirely innocent political actors.  I am saying though that they have been the object of an unprecedented massive campaign of lies that has been building for decades. Such a mountain of lies would be difficult for a saint to overcome, and for the Clintons it was impossible. They are not saints. Many of us did not appreciate this when Hillary ran for the presidency in 2016. No matter how absurd the lies accumulated and had tremendous effect.  After all, how can she combat a campaign that painted her as the leader of cabal of pedophiles operating out of the non-existent  basement of a pizza restaurant basement in Washington D.C.?  No possible evidence could refute such a massive lie.

Rush Limbaugh played an important role in manufacturing, spreading, and solidifying this campaign of lies.

As Justin Ling said in his podcast series the Flamethrowers,

“The conspiracy theory was here to stay, thanks in large part to Rush Limbaugh. No longer were the Clintons conventional political villains. They were murderers! But whether or not the Vince Foster story really took hold in the minds of Limbaugh was leading a political crusade—and he was winning.”

 

 

The result was what one political commentator called “a seismic shift to the right tonight in American political thinking. It is measuring 10.0 on the political Richter scale.” It was massive; it was powerful; and it was created by Rush Limbaugh and his revolutionary cabal of right-wing radio commentators around the country.

 

It was intensely visible in 1998 in the American mid-term elections. The Republicans took control of the House of Representatives for the first time since 1954. They picked up 54 seats in the House and enough seats to claim the Senate as well. It was the worst loss suffered by a sitting President in 50 years.

The lesson: Conspiracy theories work.

 

Moral Bankruptcy of the Conservative Party

 

This past week as the Manitoba election draws to a close, the governing party in Manitoba, the Conservative Party, has demonstrated its moral bankruptcy. 2 despicable political advertisements have shown that they cannot be allowed to speak for us. I will just comment on one of them today. The other one is equally pathetic.

One was a one-page ad published twice in the Free Press lauding Premier Stefanson’s promise to “stand firm” on the issue of searching the Prairie Green landfill for the remains of two slain Indigenous women.

It is one thing to come to a hard though-out position not to support the expensive search for remains. It is entirely different to brag about that to a base of voters largely unsympathetic to indigenous causes such as that of the Conservative party. That base may include  racists who will treat this as permission to turn ugly. It seems to me the Conservative Party has decided to try to electrify voters against indigenous people who don’t want to spend the money to find the remains of the two indigenous women.

Those remains are believed to be in a Winnipeg Landfill. As I bogged yesterday, I am not satisfied that such expense would be justified and that the money could be better spent elsewhere because money is never unlimited. Even governments have limited resources and must use them wisely. But I want to make it clear, that I dissent entirely from the actions of the Progressive Conservative Party. In fact, I admit I am uneasy about being on the same side as the Conservative Party on this particular issue.

It is also regrettable that their advertisements are not truthful. They claim the efforts to locate the remains will cost $184 million when the estimate they received said the cost would be between $84 and $184 million. Added to that, the ad claims the Premier took that decision “For health and safety reasons.”  This ignores the fact that some experts say it can be done safely. For these reasons Dan Lett of the Winnipeg Free Press called the ad “a symphony of misinformation.”

I also believe the advertisement  subtly alludes to last year’s Trucker Convoy, whose leader frequently used a similar statement during that strike and her subsequent arrest. I don’t think that similarity is accidental. Some members of their base will be attracted to that. I don’t believe the majority of Manitobans will agree.

Simply put, fuelling rancid debate like this is not what we expect of our Premiers. It certainly is not an act of reconciliation.

Charles Adler a long time conservative voice in Manitoba was bluntly harsh in his criticism of the Conservatives:

“I never thought the PCs would exploit murdered young Indigenous women to make some clumsy point about leadership character. The billboard which I first saw on Kenaston Boulevard just days ago, after doing a shop at Costco, made me want to buy a barf bag. “Stand Firm” falls flat. The message does not evoke strength of character. It does the opposite.Standing Firm on the remains of murdered Indigenous women is a confession of moral weakness. It illustrates the total collapse of values in today’s Manitoba Progressive Conservatives. As a person, who until this week has been for the most part, a reliable PC voter, I now view the party of Duff Roblin as the party of Maxime Bernier.”

 

Personally I  predict  the Conservatives’ attempts to sow division in Manitoba will fall flat and they will be roundly defeated in tomorrow’s election. Most Manitobans  are not Trumpsters.

Hysteria Rides (and falls) Again

 

 

It is hardly surprising, but hysteria has failed again. That is because hysteria rarely leads to encouraging solutions to real problems. Hysteria interferes with critical thinking.

Many Winnipeggers learned this lesson on Friday. As Maggie Macintosh reported in the Winnipeg Free Press,

More than 1,000 students — including nearly half of one elementary school’s population — were absent from classes in one Winnipeg school district Wednesday as misinformation spread online about its teachers distributing graphic sexual content.

 

Many Winnipeggers believed the nonsense they read about on social media that teachers planned to suddenly expose children to explicit and inappropriate information. That is typical of the stuff social media spreads, and unfortunately, many parents are inclined to believe such claims. People who are addicted to conspiracy theories believe stuff like this no matter how incredible it is. People living in what Kurt Anderson called “FantasyLand” are addicted to such absurdities.

 Superintendent Brian O’Leary said We had a lot of information circulating on social media, particularly within the South Asian community, telling parents that the schools were planning to hand out books with graphic sexual material to all students.”

As Macintosh reported, the Superintendent  said,

 “false and malicious fearmongering” on social media prompted hundreds of families in the Seven Oaks School Division to keep their elementary-aged children home from classes Sept. 20.

 

He also said the posts in Punjabi, Hindi and Arabic were “deliberately concocted to scare parents,” and were circulating on Facebook. The problem is that far too many parents, and others, believe everything they hear on social media, particularly if it aligns with their anti-government ideology. The problem is not gender ideology, it is the ideology of automatic distrust in government. Adherents to this ideology would much rather believe nonsense on the internet than government sources.  And this is a big problem for society.

As Macintosh said,

“About 50 per cent of students enrolled at Arthur E. Wright Community School did not show up Wednesday. The absenteeism rate dropped to five per cent Thursday. The abnormal attendance levels were recorded on the same day as the “1MillionMarch4Children” — a protest organized by a conservative group that is “against gender ideology” and claims schools are sharing “sexually explicit content” with students — played out across the country.”

 

When hysterical parents hear lies this, particularly if they have a sexual element,  they immediately move into high gear before they have a chance to think things through rationally. Hysteria is the mortal enemy of critical thinking.

I don’t think it is a coincidence either that this happened as hundreds of protesters showed up at the Manitoba Legislative Building the day before to call for more parental rights, even though they already have ample parental rights they rarely use.  When parents are haunted by fantastical visions of children being sexually abused, their reactions are on hair-trigger mode.

The president of the Manitoba Teacher’s Society Nathanial Martindale was disappointed that parents had believed such nonsense that  Manitoba teachers are out to harm children. As he said, “nothing could be further from the truth… Educators want the best for all learners and will never be onside with homophobic or transphobic hate.” But reasonable ordinary truth like that  just does not cut it on the Internet when there are salacious lies instead.

Lies and Hate travel at warp speed on the internet compared to dull truth.

 

Can 40 million listeners be wrong?

 

In 1929 America and the rest of the world experienced a crash. The 1920s, called the Roaring Twenties, when wealthy people leaped enthusiastically in to popular endeavors such as Speak Easys and led the country into financial disaster and common people were desperately unhappy about it.

Father Coughlin stepped out of the fiery preacher role on radio and became the “conduit for a real and very understandable anger.” He rode a populist wave of anger. He became the voice of outrage and had spectacular success on the perfect medium for anger—the radio.  Anger has been the bed rock of talk radio ever since, particularly right-wing talk radio.

In the language of today, Father Coughlin was a populist—he was anti-communist but also anti-capitalist. He supported some unions, but not the more radical unions. He started out left, though not extreme left. As Justin Ling the host and writer of the CBC podcast Flame Throwers said, “Coughlin’s audience was estimated at 40 million listeners. At that time that was a third of America. Limbaugh at his height would have only about 1/20th of America.” This is much more than Fox News obtains today. These were huge numbers! And all this from a Canadian priest!

Meanwhile money poured into the church he was restoring and he arranged for it to build a huge iron cross, one the KKK could not burn.Coughlin turned to a politician he could support. It was someone who distrusted the political class like he did. So, he turned instead to someone who distrusted the bankers and big business. This was a champion of everyman. Not a far right politician.  This political leader was Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the author of the new deal.

Coughlin was clear, “It is either Roosevelt or ruin,” he said. FDR was a shrewd politician and “he saw in the radio priest, a new way of meeting the masses.” Coughlin saw in FDR a vehicle for his new social justice calling.  Justin Ling pointed out “As President, FDR recognized the visceral yet intimate power of radio. Through his fireside chats he entered into America’s living rooms as a trusted guest.” Coughlin inspired the President who followed suit. As Ling said, “Coughlin is no longer that small town Catholic  fighting anti-Catholic bias.” Later Coughlin abandoned FDR when he started making deals with the bankers rather than throwing them out as he done earlier. Later, when FDR made a deal with Stalin (and Churchill) Coughlin was furious. “Coughlin was vehemently anti-Communist.” He changed his slogan to “Roosevelt and ruin.”

Coughlin started his own political party and then turned to the dark side–the far right. He blamed Jews for their own persecution. He also adopted various conspiracy theories such as the one that Jewish bankers were part of an international cabal. He also cited the conspiracy theory of the elders of Zion which falsely claimed that Jews were part of a international Jewish conspiracy to rule the world. He claimed that Jews and Communists together were determined to take over America. Coughlin gave up on left wing causes and turned instead to supporting Hitler and the Nazis. He went about as far right as he could go.

He came to be called “the father of Hate radio.” Though someone else grabbed that crown from him about 100 years later.  We will get to him. Coughlin began to be abandoned by his erst while supporters. Many called out his mistaken litany of facts that were not facts at all. Federal regulators warned him that they would not allow the airwaves to abused in that manner. As Ling said, “In today’s world he was cancelled and de-platformed.” The radio star was done, but his influence lived on to be used by other pundits from other political persuasions.

As Ling said, “Coughlin was radio’s first real celebrity. He weaponized bombast but met his listeners where they were at. He sat in their living rooms and echoed their concerns. He helped to propel presidents to power. He tried to have a say in running the country from behind a microphone.”  He did all this by unleashing the power of hate. He was soon followed by many others.

The genie of political radio was out of the bottle and would never get back in. as Ling said, “Coughlin fell into conspiracy theories and hate as a way to energize and galvanize his support, and he would not be the last.” Once politicians, pundits, and frauds saw the power of hate, others followed as surely as night follows day. He proved how powerful the toxic combination of racism, hatred, and conspiracy theories could be.

 

 

 

Fear: The Secret Sauce of American politics

 

Conspiracy theories have abounded both on the right and the left. Of course, conspiracy theories were vitally connected to the right-wing movement and radio talk show hosts knew how to utilize them to advance their cherished cause. They also knew that fears drove these theories and hence drove their movement.

Many people were moved by paranoid fears of dangerous others, such as Communists who wanted to change the world that they liked and virile black men who were out to rape innocent white women whom they also liked.

Carl McIntire was dead center of another vitally important factor in the promulgation of right-wing theology in the south and that came right out of the credulity for which the south was robustly fertile. Southerners since birth had been taught to believe and believing was something they could do with astonishing ease and  vigour. It beggared belief to see the beliefs they could cheerfully swallow. They created what Kurt Anderson referred to as FantasyLands.

As McIntire and his cohorts were creating profound fears in America of 5th columns, commies under every bed, a Red Scare, churlish Bolshevism, the Yellow Peril, and Uncle Joseph’s secret plot, among many others. Notice the common thread here—FEAR. American was driven by fear. I have often said, America is the most fearful country in the world. That is why it spends so much money on its military—as much as the next 9 countries spend combined!

As Paul Matzko said, “You can’t understand the American political scene in the 1960s without realizing how pervasive conspiracy theorizing was on both sides of the aisle and how much political discourse was spread by paranoid fears.” In my opinion, paranoia is the secret sauce of American politics.” And it has been since its inception. The reason for that is fascinating. My theory is it is largely based on a guilty conscience and that conscience has been largely unacknowledged since the days of its genocide of the American indigenous people followed shortly after by a second genocide against millions of imported black slave labourers from Africa. America has a lot it should feel guilty about. That guilt has supercharged hatred, violence, destruction on massive scales. Guilt has fire started paranoia. The result has been horrific, and it continues to this day. And it will not stop haunting that great country until it acknowledges its sins and repents. Nothing short of that can save it and the American right-wing has spent most of its energy trying to hide the black reality of its sins from itself and its offspring.  Only truth can set it free. America urgently needs truth and reconciliation. Instead the Republican Party offers comforting myths and obfuscation.

An astonishingly interesting consequence of this  is the rich fertile  soil of fear of dangerous others. This has bred a unfathomable number of wildly irrational conspiracy theories that have gained mind-numbing numbers of adherents filled with zealotry. Many of the hit movies of the time disgorged theories of right-wing authoritarian coups. Novels and films like Seven Days in May warned of a coup by Communists assisted by corrupt and treacherous American officials. These were also the fears that generated the McCarthy witch hunts. Then there was that amazing film Dr. Strangelove whose name said it all.  The basis of that film was dread at the prospect that Russians were working on a doomsday device.

Carl McIntire  in his radio shows was the one who proved how powerful the anti-Communist hysteria was. And we must remember that it was exactly that—hysteria. It was insane and it was found at the centre of the richest and most powerful country in the world. No amount of wealth and no power can hold back secret and terrifying guilt.

 

Jordan Klepper Fingers the Conspiracies

 

On my regular walks in Arizona, I have enjoyed many interesting podcasts, including some  about the crazy things done by Trumpsters. One series of such podcasts were hosted by Jordan Klepper under the title “Jordan Klepper Fingers the Conspiracies.”  I have listened to a number of them.

On one of such walks through Johnson Ranch in San Tan Valley I learned about Trumpsters who believe that even though Trump lost the election he is still in charge. They believe he still leads the American armed forces.

Klepper specializes in attending Trump rallies for the Daily Show on television in order to interview Trumpsters. Often they are hilarious. All he has to do is ask them questions and they do the rest. But I loved one comment he made: “you can tell how these people really love America by the weapons they have bought to hurt other Americans.” For example, the Proud Boys, who are strong Trump supporters expect the American military to attack them so they must be prepared. In America that means they must be heavily armed.

Often crazy conspiracy theories have a hint of truth to them. For example, on January 6th of this year it was obvious that a number of military types still support Donald Trump. To them he is still the Commander-in-Chief. Nothing he can do will change that! They would die on the hill for Trump if he asked them to. Frankly, to me that is a little frightening.

Many of the Trumpsters are former members, or even current members, of the American military. And conspiracy theories gather around the military like iron filings collect around magnets. I believe the reason for this is the extraordinary level of fear among the theorists. A military of course is important to all of us. They are meant to protect us from some of our worst fears. As a result, conspiracy theories abound in and around the military. For example, there is a new theory in the United States that Donald Trump is still calling the shots for the military, even though he is no longer the president.

General Mike Flynn was Trump’s was the 24th U.S. National Security Advisor who was appointed by president Donald Trump and he lasted exactly 22 days of the Trump administration. He resigned after it was revealed he had lied to Mike Pence and others vetting Flynn for the advisor position.

Flynn held some whacky conspiracy views and it is disturbing that for 22 days he was so close to Commander-in-Chief of the United States. In some of his on-line posts he showed that he gave credence to conspiracy theories including the one that there was a plot to kill Navy Seals  involving current President Joe Biden who had been involved in the assassination of Osama bin Laden by the Seals.

Trump also endorsed such views when he re-tweeted some of those theories. Trump denied that re-tweeting constituted an endorsement of such theories, but what else could that mean? We also must remember that Donald Trump had about 50 million Twitter followers at the time, so re-posting such theories was a dangerous thing. Trump followers notoriously believe what Trump says and don’t require evidence to back up his claims. His proclamations are enough to convince them no matter how much contrary evidence is available.

Another on-going conspiracy theory—most of these never seem to end—was the call by Trumpsters to the Attorney-General to investigate reports that in Italy certain nefarious actors had hacked the voting machines in American election, even though they offered no evidence that this had happened. As Klepper commented, this theory had “as much substance as cotton candy that had been put through a clothes dryer.” These conspiracy theorists expected the authorities to pay attention to these wild and unsubstantiated claims.

Conspiracy theories aren’t getting more rational are they?

Credulity in America is a serious problem. This is one more sign of serious decline in American society. Having a president or national security advisor promulgating them can have serious consequences.

 

We are Doomed

 

Not every one likes Bill Maher.  I know he is the worst interviewer on television.  Often he does not let his guests speak, but speaks up for them instead.  As well, when he lets them speak, he has some very interesting guests from all ends of the political spectrum from Steve Bannon to Nancy Pelosi.  And he sometimes makes some very interesting points.

For example, he was the first one to predict that Trump would never resign after he was elected president. He said that almost immediately after the election in 2016!  Now every one knows that. But not many said that in 2016. But Maher has also appreciated, as few others do, that this refusal now has important consequences.  Americans seem to be tolerating, if not encouraging,  this refusal even though the peaceful transfer of power has for long been considered the most important characteristic of democracy. It is what distinguishes democracy from autocracy.

And now millions of Americans have demonstrated clearly that they don’t think this element of democracy is important. They don’t care! I have found this astonishing. Many have not. Many shrug their shoulders as if it didn’t matter.

Maher said “Well we had a good run.”  On November 8, 2022 Americans had a chance to vote for democracy. As Joe Biden and many Democrats said, “Democracy is on the ballot.”  And they were right. And it didn’t matter to millions Americans. Inflation was more important than democracy. Bill Maher predicted this 4 days before the election as if it was a foregone conclusion. This is what he said,

“Tuesday is the election and I know I should tell you to vote in the most important election ever. So, O.K., yes. You should vote.  And it should be for the one party that still stands for democracy preservation. But it’s also a waste of breath because anyone who believes that is already voting and anybody who needs to learn that isn’t watching and no one in America can be persuaded about anything anymore anyway.”

On this point Maher is right.  No one will change their mind. Trump was right when he said he could stand in Times Square, murder someone and it wouldn’t make any difference to his supporters. They are that determined to vote for him no matter what he says or does. that gives him a lot of rope.  Look at the mountains of evidence revealing his nefarious deeds. Yet, his supporters are filled with religious devotion that cannot be altered. No one can be convinced out of a theological devotion. That in itself is enough to kill democracy.

Maher gave another pertinent example—the January 6th hearings. Those hearings provided Americans with an overwhelmingly convincing narrative that Donald Trump had no respect for democracy as he led the charge against democracy and his devoted followers followed. As Maher said,

“The January 6th hearings it turned out changed nobody’s mind. Democrat Jamie Raskin said the hearings “will tell a story that will really blow the roof off the House.”  No that was Hurricane Ian. Hearings roof not blown. The Committee did a masterful job laying out the case but we live in Partisan American now. So it’s a little like doing stand-up when half the crowd only speaks Mandarin. No matter how good the material is it’s not going to go over. After all the hearings the percentage of Americans who thought Trump did nothing wrong. Went up 3 points! That’s America now.”

 

Again, Maher is right. The truth did not matter! All that mattered was that millions of people are devoted to Trump and nothing—absolutely nothing—will turn them away from their religious leader. The overwhelming narrative is irrelevant.

I am a Canadian; I have no dog in this hunt. But I do. America is the leader of the modern world. Maybe not for much longer, but for now that is true. If America coughs the rest of the world catches a cold.

 I am posting this as the election is drawing to a close. I don’t know any results. I hope Maher is wrong; if fear he is right.

Are we doomed?  Let’s see what happens tonight.

Thoughtlessness

 Hannah Arendt also wrote a book about the trial of Adolf Eichmann. She used that famous expression “the banality of evil” to describe him and his kind.  He was a man who facilitated horrid acts of violence against the Jews.  But Arendt said what set him apart was his “thoughtlessness.” To her he looked and acted like a boring accountant.

She had been shocked by how glib he was in court. He talked about exterminating millions of Jews as if it was nothing. What was there for him to admit to, he asked. He suggested, as did Himmler, that they could be reconciled with the Jews.  They had a sense of elation when they considered this possibility. But the feelings were not real. It was, in Arendt’s phrase, “an outrageous cliché.”  She said, “it was a self-fabricated stock phrase, as devoid of reality as those clichés by which people had lived for twelve years.”  As Carol Brightman said, “Clichés and conventional sentiments functioned as armor blocking the consciousness of the accused at just those painful junctures where painful intrusions of reality threatened.” These are some of the enemies of thought. In fact, during the trial Arendt had noticed how Eichmann was not perturbed by his starling contradictions. He was certainly not engaged in thinking. He was not stupid. He was just completely thoughtless.

Arendt was stunned that such horrific crimes could be committed without consciousness. She said she disagreed with Kant, who, according to her believed that stupidity was caused by a wicked heart. She contended instead that “absence of thought is not stupidity, it can be found in highly intelligent people, and a wicked heart is not its cause, it is probably the other way around, that wickedness may be caused by absence of thought.”

According to her teaching assistant Kohn, Arendt believed, as I believe, that “thinking conditions people to resist evildoing.”  Most ethicists do not accept this, but I find it profoundly compelling. I believe, like the American novelist Henry James, that ethics is high reason. Where there is no reason there is no ethics. this is what the sleep of reason is all about.

Arendt was clear when she said that everyone could think. Of course, that does not mean that everyone will think. You didn’t have to have an education to think. She was not elitist.

Arendt got mad when Jews accused her of being self-hating and anti-Jewish as a result of her book on Eichmann. She said that all she wanted to do was to think about what he had done. She wanted to understand him and that was not the same as forgiving him or being soft on the Nazis. It was her job as a philosopher to think about these things. And she thought that was very important. In the film about her, Arendt summed up her thinking this way,

“Trying to understand is not the same as forgiveness. It is my responsibility to try to understand. It is the responsibility of anyone who tries to put pen to paper on this subject. Since Socrates and Plato we have understood thinking to be a silent dialogue between me and myself. In refusing to be a person Eichmann utterly surrendered that single most defining human quality, that of being able to think. And consequently he was no longer capable of making moral judgments. This inability to think created the possibility for many ordinary men to commit evil deeds on a gigantic scale, the like of which one had never seen before. It is true I have considered these questions in a philosophical way. The manifestation of the mind of thought is not knowledge, but the ability to tell right from wrong; beautiful from ugly. And I hope that thinking gives people the strength to prevent catastrophes in these rare moments when the chips are down.  ”

 

For Hannah Arendt, what thinking meant was to train the mind to go wandering.  I love that concept. It brings me back to my concept of meandering.  I love to meander–physically and mentally. That is the essence of free thinking (and there is really no other kind) to meander through thoughts without regard to preconceived ideas, ideologies, or prejudices. Only the free mind can think. I said that. But that is a concept directly inspired by Arendt.

Arendt’s first major book was On the Origins of Totalitarianism. She thought there was something new or modern about totalitarianism. It was not like anything we had seen before. It presented profound change from everything that preceded it. It was much more than tyranny or dictatorship. It cut at individual will. It cut at our individual identity. In fact, according to one of Arendt’s most profound insights, totalitarianism cuts at our capacity to think.

As always, I ask myself how this is relevant to our times. There are not many totalitarian regimes around right now, but there are movements—various forms of populist movements—that tend in the same direction. I think often of the American near fascists—i.e. the Trumpsters, the insurrectionists on Capitol Hill that were looking to hang Mike Pence only because their leader told them that he had been betrayed by Pence.  That was enough to set off ordinary people looking to hang the vice-president of their country! Had they lost the capacity to think? To me it seemed that way.

The Origins of Totalitarianism: Hannah Arendt and the War on Truth

 

This is what Hannah Arendt said in her magnificent book published in 1951 called the Origins of Totalitarianism:

“Before they seize power and establish a world according to their doctrines, totalitarian movements conjure up a lying world of consistency which is more than adequate to the needs of the human mind than reality itself; in which through sheer imagination, uprooted masses can feel at home and are spared the never-ending shocks which real life and real experience deal to human beings and their expectations. The force possessed by totalitarian propaganda—before the movements have the power to drop iron curtains to prevent anyone’s disturbing, by the slightest reality, the gruesome quiet of an entirely imaginary world—lies in the its ability to shut the masses off from the real world.”

 

This is exactly what Hitler did, Putin did, and Trump is trying to do right now. It is interesting to me that National Review the American conservative journal ranked it #15 in the on its list of the greatest non-fiction books of the 20th century.

 

It is astonishingly to me how Arendt could have been writing about Trumpsters in the early 1950s. It is so incredibly prescient. These words can be applied precisely to them decades after the words were written, showing once again that Arendt was the pre-eminent political philosopher of the 20th century.

Hannah Arendt paid attention to the people who supported totalitarian movements. She did not dismiss them like Hillary Clinton did. This is what she said,

“Totalitarian movements are possible wherever there are masses who for one reason or another have acquired the appetite for political organization. Masses are not held together by a consciousness of a common interest and they lack that specific class articulateness which is expressed in determined, limited, and obtainable goals.”

 

For example, with Donald Trump many people, like me, were often surprised that the masses would support him because it wasn’t really in their best interests. He obviously didn’t really care about the masses. He carried about his rich buddies (to the extent that he cared about anyone). The masses are the people who don’t fit into any organization. His fans just wanted to join a group that would wreck things. It was the same in Nazi Germany where, we should never forget, Nazis were originally elected to power. Arendt noticed this about Nazi Germans and Communists. As she said,

“It was characteristic of the rise of the Nazi movement in Germany and of the Communist movements in Europe after 1930 that they recruited their members from this mass of apparently indifferent people whom all other parties had given up as too apathetic or too stupid for their attention.”

 

In other words the Nazis and Communists found supporters among the “basket of deplorables” of Europe. Just like Trump did in the US in 2016. No one paid attention to these people before in Germany, Russia or the US. That made things convenient. These people were never involved in or even cared about politics before. As a result, the demagogues could use entirely new methods of political propaganda. As Arendt, said they had “indifference to the arguments of their opponents.” Just like the Trumpsters.

As a result the mass movements of Europe put themselves out of the political system and against the political system. As a result

“they found a membership that had never been “spoiled” by the party system. Therefore, they did not need to refute opposing arguments and consistent preferred methods which ended in death rather than persuasion, which spelled terror rather than conviction. They presented disagreements as invariably originating in deep natural, social, or psychological sources beyond the control of the individual and therefore beyond the power of reason. This would have been a shortcoming only if they had sincerely entered into competition with other parties; it was not if they were sure of dealing with people who had reason to be equally hostile to all parties.”

 

Again this could not have described Trump and Trumpsters better. Remember they were equally hostile to Republicans and Democrats. Trump only used the  Republican party  because it was convenient. He was never a Republican. He was never a conservative. His ideology, again to the extent he had one, was fascist racism  (white supremacy) and nationalism. As Arendt said,

“Thus when totalitarian movements invaded Parliament with their contempt for parliamentary government, they merely appeared inconsistent: actually they succeeded in convincing the people at large that parliamentary majorities were spurious and did not necessarily correspond to the realities of the country”…

 

Once again Arendt prophesied Trump and his supporters in astonishingly specific terms.

This is a book worth reading!