Thursday, December 29, 2016

Robert Reich: My Wishes for Obama's Parting Shots

Obama did Step 3 today, imposing sanctions on Russia.  Hope he follows through on the other Reich suggestions as well!

My Wishes for Obama's Parting Shots
by Robert Reich | December 29, 2016 - 7:30am

— from Robert Reich's Blog

President-elect Donald Trump is accusing President Obama of putting up "roadblocks" to a smooth transition. 

In reality, I think President Obama has been too cooperative with Trump. 

In the waning days of his administration, I'd recommend Obama take the following last stands:

1. Name Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court. Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution gives the President power to fill any vacancy during the recess of the Senate. The Supreme Court is no exception: Justice William Brennan began his Court tenure with a recess appointment in 1956. Any appointments made this way expire at the end of the next Senate session. So if Obama appointed Garland on January 3, the appointment would last until December 2017, the end of the first session of the 115th Congress.

2. Use his pardoning authority to forgive "Dreamers." With a flick of his pen, Obama could forgive the past and future civil immigration offenses of the nearly 750,000 young people granted legal status under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. Without an immigration offense on their records, they could more easily apply for legal status.

3. Impose economic sanctions on Russia for interfering in the 2016 presidential election – including blocking all loans or investments by Russian nationals in all real estate ventures in the United States.

4. Protect the civil service from the Trump transition. Instruct all cabinet departments and agencies not to respond to any Trump transition team inquiry that might intimidate any individual members of the civil service.

5. Issue an executive order protecting the independence of all government fact-finding agencies: Included would be the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Center for Education Statistics, National Center for Health Statistics, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Energy Information. (Trump could repeal the order, but that would be politically costly.)

6. Issue an executive order protecting the independence of all Inspectors General in every cabinet department and agency. (Ditto.)

7. Issue a report on possible tax and benefit cuts, showing which state's citizens will most benefit from tax cuts going to the richest Americans and largest corporations (overwhelmingly the citizens of blue states), and which will lose the most from cuts in Medicaid and repeal of Obamacare (overwhelmingly red states), along with estimates of such gains.


Share:

Friday, December 23, 2016

Dianne Rehm says farewell to her show on NPR: So sorry to see her go...

http://money.cnn.com/2016/12/23/media/diane-rehm-final-broadcast/index.html

She was my favorite on NPR -- she always asked the exact questions of her guests that I would have asked!  She and her gravelly voice will be sorely missed...
Share:

How Demagogues Erode Freedom of the Press


Trump's Attack on the Freedom of the Press
by Robert Reich | December 23, 2016

— from Robert Reich's Blog

Historically, tyrants have tried to control the press using 4 techniques that, worryingly, Donald Trump is already using.

1. Berate the media and turn the public against it. Trump refers to journalists as "dishonest," "disgusting" and "scum." When Trump lies – claiming, for example, "massive voter fraud" in the election, and that he "won in a landslide" – and the media call him on those lies, Trump claims the media is lying. Even televised satires he labels "unfunny, one-sided, and pathetic."

2. Limit media access. Trump hasn't had a news conference since July. (His two predecessors had news conferences within days of being declared president.) He's blocked the media from traveling with him, and even from knowing with whom he's meeting. His phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin, which occurred shortly after the election, was first reported by the Kremlin.

3. Threaten the media. During the campaign, Trump threatened to sue the New York Times for libel in response to an article about two women who accused him of touching them inappropriately years ago, and then another that revealed part of his 1995 tax returns. He says he plans to "open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money."

4. Bypass the media and communicate with the public directly. Trump tweets incessantly, issues videos, and holds large rallies – all of which further enable him to lie directly to the public with impunity.

The word "media" comes from "intermediate" between the powerful and the public. The media hold the powerful accountable by correcting their misstatements, asking them hard questions, and reporting on what they do. Apparently Trump wants to eliminate such intermediaries.

Historically, these 4 techniques have been used by demagogues to erode the freedom and independence of the press. Donald Trump seems intent on doing exactly this.
Share:

Thursday, December 22, 2016

An enlightening/frightening comparison

2.8 million more voters cast their votes for Clinton over Trump. These voters who gave Clinton an overwhelming popular vote, are aware of the iniquitous similarities between Trump and Hitler.  Those who support Trump are oblivious to those similarities--to their great detriment, and ours.

Trump and Hitler
by Bob Burnett | December 22, 2016

It's impossible to read Volker Ulrich's remarkable biography, "Hitler, Ascent: 1889-1939," without being struck by the parallels between Adolph Hitler and Donald Trump.

1.They were both charismatic political leaders. Watching grainy newsreel footage of Hitler speaking, it's difficult to imagine what a hypnotic spell he cast on his pre-war German audiences. Just as it's difficult to understand the impact of Trump rallies on his devotees.

Ulrich says that Germans were captivated by Hitler's passion and authenticity. That's what Trump followers say about him.

2. Both men gave voice to the zeitgeist of their times. In Munich, Hitler claimed that Germany had been betrayed at the end of WWI, "stabbed in the back" by Jews.

Trump has give voice to the "Alt-Right"/Tea-Party perspective that America has been tyrannized by Obama and the liberal elite. Trump spoke to the "Alt-Right"/Tea Party when he said, "I have joined the political arena so that the powerful can no longer beat up on people that cannot defend themselves."

3. Both blamed the "fall" of their countries on a particular group. For Hitler this was Jews. For Trump this is immigrants.

Hitler conflated Jews, communists, and intellectuals. Trump conflates undocumented immigrants and Muslims. One of the reasons he gives for building "the wall" is to keep out terrorists. (Trump's national-security adviser, Mike Flynn, claims there are Arabic road signs at the southern border.)

4. Hitler and Trump repeated two principal themes. Hitler claimed that Germany had been betrayed by Jews. He added that for Germany to achieve its historical greatness it had to expand to the east, lebensraum.

Trump believes that America has been betrayed by its liberal leadership and undermined by immigrants. He claims that previous Presidents didn't know how to negotiate deals and promises he will renegotiate everything, including agreements such as NAFTA and the Iran nuclear disarmament.

5. After building broad support among under-educated white voters (Trump declared happily, "I Love the Poorly Educated!"), Trump and Hitler cut a deal with capitalists. Although Hitler ran the National Socialist German Worker's Party (NSDAP), he made it clear to German business leaders that his aims were not those of traditional socialists but rather to exterminate the threat of communism, which he claimed was led by Jews. In 1933, when Hitler became German Chancellor, he had the support of most business leaders.

Although Trump initially started out as an outsider, after he secured the Republican nomination for President he cut a deal with conservative business leaders such as the Koch brothers, Robert Mercer, and Wall Street billionaires.

6. Both men were/are pathological liars. Hitler blamed the 1933 Reichstag fire on communists even though a single deranged man, Marinus van der Lubbe, was caught at the scene. After the December, 2015, San Bernardino shootings, Trump blamed the killings on Muslims, in general, and called for shutting down entry of Muslims into the United States as well as starting a registry of American Muslims.

Observers described Hitler as a consummate actor who varied his message depending upon the audience. Before partisan crowds he would make extreme statements about "the Jewish problem." Before business leaders, or the press, Hitler would moderate his message.

Trump's most inflammatory statements have come during his speeches. When speaking to the press he will moderate his message. For example, Trump has told crowds that global climate change is "bunk" or "a hoax." When speaking to the press, he claims to have an open mind on the issue.

7. Hitler and Trump condone violence. From his earliest Munich beerhall days, Hitler was surrounded by the S.A. (Sturmabteilung, storm troopers), thugs and hooligans who beat hecklers and members of the political opposition.

Trump has condoned violence at this rallies, occasionally calling for hecklers to be beaten. His Alt-Right supporters believe that the Obama Administration is tyrannical and have sanctioned armed response.

8. Both men nurture resentment. Supposedly, Hitler had a photographic memory and never forgot a slight. 18 months after becoming German Chancellor, during "the night of the long knives," he authorized the killing of his rivals and those he believed had slighted him.

More generally, Hitler inflamed German resentment about WWI and the great depression. He consistently blamed Jews.

Apparently, Donald Trump never forgets a slight. During his campaign we saw him lash out at Judge Gonzalo Curiel, former Miss Universe Alicia Machado, and gold-star father Khizr Khan, among others. He has advocated that Hillary Clinton be investigated and "locked up."

More generally, Trump inflamed Alt-Right/Tea-Party resentment about what they perceive as the loss of their country.

9. Early in their careers, both Hitler and Trump were underestimated because political observers did not appreciate the power of the demagogic narrative. Hitler was mocked because of his appearance, and lack of governmental experience. Trump was mocked because of his appearance, and lack of governmental experience.

10. In order to secure power, Hitler and Trump changed the rules. Hitler's NSDAP Party never had a majority in the German parliament but Hitler continually manipulated the rules to gain increased power. (And then, outlawed the opposition.)

Trump won the presidency, in part, because Republicans changed the rules about who could vote and the role of billionaire-driven Super PACs. Now Trump wants to change conflict-of-interest rules so he can retain control of his business investments while sitting in the White House.

Comparing Trump and Hitler is not hyperbole. There are chilling similarities.
Share:

NEWT: Trump never really meant to "drain the swamp" He just said it for votes

Merry Christmas, in spite of it all!!!!

King Donald can't very well claim he is draining the swamp from the alligators as he adds bigger alligators to it.  So, Newt (a man with a name that fits him perfectly) for once speaks the truth.  Donald only said that and many other of his "cute" promises to get votes from the duped electorate.  (As if we didn't know this!--but there are many Trump voters who naively believed everything Trump told them...and still do!)  With this revelation, don't expect those voters to desert Trump. Oh no, they will double down on their support, no matter if he starts a nuclear war -- which, from today's news, it looks like he is trying to do.  Welcome to Trump Bizarro Land -- where a President-elect has already committed impeachable offenses and hasn't even taken office yet.  And his supporters don't care at all that he lied to them, over and over and over.  As the little Emperor (with no clothes) has declared, "They would vote for me even if I murdered someone in the middle of 5th Avenue."  Yep. That is where we have come to with the GOP and its voters.  Thanks to their votes, the rest of us know we are in for a VERY BUMPY RIDE.
ANDREW BURTON / REUTERS

After campaigning on a promise to clean up Washington and rid it of special interests, Donald Trump has stacked his team with the likes of former Goldman Sachs banker Steven Mnuchin and ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson

Now, just weeks before taking office, Trump has decided to sideline his pledge to "drain the swamp," his ally Newt Gingrich said Wednesday.

"I'm told he now just disclaims that," Gingrich (R-Ga.) the former House speaker, told NPR's "Morning Edition." "He now says it was cute, but he doesn't want to use it anymore."

Gingrich posted to Twitter this week what he described to NPR as "a very cute tweet" about the alligators in Washington. But someone ― Gingrich didn't disclose who ― sent him a note saying they were tired of hearing such talk.

Gingrich told NPR he's noticed a post-election change in Trump's attitude about certain things, namely the "lock her up" chant that rang through campaign events. 

Trump this month acknowledged his threat to imprison Hillary Clinton for using a private email server was a show to garner support. 

Apparently, vowing to "drain the swamp" may have been more of the same.

"Maybe he feels that, as president, as the next president of the United States, that he should be marginally more dignified than talking about alligators in swamps," Gingrich said.

Gingrich said he personally likes the metaphor and thinks it "vividly illustrates the problem, because all the people in this city who are the alligators are going to hate the swamp being drained, and there's going to be constant infighting over it."

But if Trump decides to drop the refrain, Gingrich said he would do the same.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), among others, has blasted Trump since the election for backpedaling on his promise to keep special interests out of Washington.

"What we are now beginning to see is what I feared," Sanders said in November. "And that is a lot of what Mr. Trump was saying to get votes turns out to be not what he intends to do as the president of the United States."


Share:

NEWT: Trump never really meant to "drain the swamp" He just said it for votes

King Donald can't very well claim he is draining the swamp from the alligators as he adds bigger alligators to it.  So, Newt (a man with a name that fits him perfectly) for once speaks the truth.  Donald only said that and many other of his "cute" promises to get votes from the duped electorate.  (As if we didn't know this!--but there are many Trump voters who naively believed everything Trump told them...and still do!)  With this revelation, don't expect those voters to desert Trump. Oh no, they will double down on their support, no matter if he starts a nuclear war -- which, from today's news, it looks like he is trying to do.  Welcome to Trump Bizarro Land -- where a President-elect has already committed impeachable offenses and hasn't even taken office yet.  And his supporters don't care at all that he lied to them, over and over and over.  As the little Emperor (with no clothes) has declared, "They would vote for me even if I murdered someone in the middle of 5th Avenue."  Yep. That is where we have come to with the GOP and its voters.  Thanks to their votes, the rest of us know we are in for a VERY BUMPY RIDE.
ANDREW BURTON / REUTERS

After campaigning on a promise to clean up Washington and rid it of special interests, Donald Trump has stacked his team with the likes of former Goldman Sachs banker Steven Mnuchin and ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson

Now, just weeks before taking office, Trump has decided to sideline his pledge to "drain the swamp," his ally Newt Gingrich said Wednesday.

"I'm told he now just disclaims that," Gingrich (R-Ga.) the former House speaker, told NPR's "Morning Edition." "He now says it was cute, but he doesn't want to use it anymore."

Gingrich posted to Twitter this week what he described to NPR as "a very cute tweet" about the alligators in Washington. But someone ― Gingrich didn't disclose who ― sent him a note saying they were tired of hearing such talk.

Gingrich told NPR he's noticed a post-election change in Trump's attitude about certain things, namely the "lock her up" chant that rang through campaign events. 

Trump this month acknowledged his threat to imprison Hillary Clinton for using a private email server was a show to garner support. 

Apparently, vowing to "drain the swamp" may have been more of the same.

"Maybe he feels that, as president, as the next president of the United States, that he should be marginally more dignified than talking about alligators in swamps," Gingrich said.

Gingrich said he personally likes the metaphor and thinks it "vividly illustrates the problem, because all the people in this city who are the alligators are going to hate the swamp being drained, and there's going to be constant infighting over it."

But if Trump decides to drop the refrain, Gingrich said he would do the same.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), among others, has blasted Trump since the election for backpedaling on his promise to keep special interests out of Washington.

"What we are now beginning to see is what I feared," Sanders said in November. "And that is a lot of what Mr. Trump was saying to get votes turns out to be not what he intends to do as the president of the United States."


Share:

Wednesday, December 21, 2016

Donald Trump's Doctor: 'If Something Happens To Him, Then It Happens To Him'

Trump won't let us see his taxes and he won't let us see his medical records, either, but his doctor doesn't seem worried because "that's why we have a Vice President."  Welcome to Trump Bizarro World where, in addition, well-known psychiatrists are questioning the President-elect's mental stability (with GOOD REASON). 

Donald Trump's Doctor: 'If Something Happens To Him, Then It Happens To Him'

thecitizeNY 
 

trump-doctor-screen

Things that American voters don't know about President-elect Donald Trump: The truth.

And that includes the truth about the health of our incoming commander-in-chief. While Trump and his team made the health and stamina of Hillary Clinton a huge issue throughout the campaign, they don't think his own health matters are anyone's business. So like his taxes, he won't be releasing his medical records either.

That doesn't seem to bother Dr. Harold Bornstein, Trnydailynews.com/.../trump-doc-article-1.2918538ump's personal physician since 1980, who apparently is flatlining on his famous patient's health.

In a one-on-one interview with STAT News published Wednesday, Bornstein said, "If something happens to him, then it happens to him. That's why we have a vice president and a speaker of the House and a whole line of people. They can just keep dying."

Bornstein hasn't seen his famous patient since the election, but that response seems a far cry from that glowing letter Bornstein wrote about the then-candidate's health, claiming that "If elected, Mr. Trump, I can state unequivocally, will be the healthiest individual ever elected to presidency."

Now all he has to say basically is if he dies, he dies? Yeah, well, Dr. Bornstein may not be worried about our President-elect's health, but we damn well are. And not only his physical health. In a letter written to President Obama,three professors of psychiatry, including Judith Herman of Harvard Medical School, also called Trump's mental stability into question.

The letter read, in part:

"We are writing to express our grave concern regarding the mental stability of our President-Elect. Professional standards do not permit us to venture a diagnosis for a public figure whom we have not evaluated personally. Nevertheless, his widely reported symptoms of mental instability - including grandiosity, impulsivity, hypersensitivity to slights or criticism, and an apparent inability to distinguish between fantasy and reality - lead us to question his fitness for the immense responsibilities of the office."

So not only is Donald Trump unqualified for the presidential position, he may also be physically and mentally unfit. Unfortunately for America, we won't be finding out until after January 20th.

Share:

Tuesday, December 20, 2016

IMPORTANT VIDEO: Robert Reich warns of future under Trump on Democracy Now

Robert Reich speaks truth with intelligent perspicacity. He says about Trump: "If anything, his leanings are toward tyranny, and by tyranny I simply mean someone who absorbs the trappings of power but doesn't understand that he, in a democracy, is a public servant. He is working for us, we are not working for him."
In many ways Donald Trump seems to be indifferent, at best, to the democratic process." 

This video should be viewed by EVERYONE who is concerned about the future of our country, the world and our planet under a tyrannical Trump presidency.  Reich's warnings are prescient and should be taken VERY seriously.

Video of his Democracy Now interview by Amy Goodman can be seen here, in which he expands on his essay that follows below:  http://www.rawstory.com/2016/12/robert-reich-warns-americans-of-future-under-trump-a-tyrant-who-absorbs-the-trappings-of-power/

Read Reich's warning in the following essay:

Trump's Seven Techniques to Control the Media


SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 2016

Democracy depends on a free and independent press, which is why all tyrants try to squelch it. They use seven techniques that, worryingly, President-elect Donald Trump already employs.

1. Berate the media. Last week, Trump summoned two-dozen TV news anchors and executives to the twenty-fifth floor of Trump Tower to berate them for their reporting about him during the election. For twenty minutes he railed at what he called their "outrageous" and "dishonest" coverage. According to an attendee, "Trump kept saying, 'we're in a room of liars, the deceitful dishonest media who got it all wrong,'" and he called CNN a "network of liars." He accused NBC of using unflattering pictures of him, demanding to know why they didn't use "nicer" pictures.

Another person who attended the meeting said Trump "truly doesn't seem to understand the First Amendment. He thinks we are supposed to say what he says and that's it."

2. Blacklist critical media. During the campaign, Trump blacklisted news outlets whose coverage he didn't approve of. In June he pulled The Washington Post's credentials. "Based on the incredibly inaccurate coverage and reporting of the record setting Trump campaign, we are hereby revoking the press credentials of the phony and dishonest Washington Post," read a post on Trump's Facebook page.

After the election Trump agreed to meet with the New York Times and then suddenly cancelled the meeting when he didn't like the terms, tweeting "Perhaps a new meeting will be set up with the @nytimes. In the meantime they continue to cover me inaccurately and with a nasty tone!" (He then reversed himself again and met with the Times.) 

3. Turn the public against the media. Trump refers to journalists as "lying," "dishonest," "disgusting" and "scum." Referring to the journalists at his rallies, Trump said, "I hate some of these people," adding (presumably in response to allegations of Vladimir Putin's treatment of dissident journalists) "but I'd never kill 'em." 

He questions the press's motives, claiming, for example, that The Washington Post wrote negative things about him because its publisher, Jeffrey Bezos, a founder of Amazon, "thinks I would go after him for antitrust." When the New York Timeswrote that his transition team was in disarray, Trump tweeted that the newspaper was  "just upset that they looked like fools in their coverage of me" during the presidential campaign.

4. Condemn satirical or critical comments. Trump continues to condemn the coverage he's received from NBC's "Saturday Night Live." In response to Alex Baldwin's recent portrayal of him as overwhelmed by the prospect of being president, Trump tweeted that it was a "totally one-sided, biased show – nothing funny at all. Equal time for us?"

When Brandon Victor Dixon, the actor who plays Aaron Burr in the Broadway musical "Hamilton," read from the stage a message to Vice President-elect Mike Pence, who was in the audience – expressing fears about the pending Trump administration for the "diverse group of men and women of different colors, creeds and orientations" on the cast – Trump responded angrily. He tweeted that Pence had been "harassed," and insisted that the cast and producers of the show, "which I hear is highly overrated," apologize.

5. Threaten the media directly. Trump said he plans to change libel laws in the United States so that he can have an easier time suing news organizations. "One of the things I'm going to do if I win … I'm going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money."

During the campaign, Trump specifically threatened to sue the Times for libel in response to an article that featured two women accusing him of touching them inappropriately years ago. Trump claimed the allegations were false, and his lawyer demanded that the newspaper retract the story and issue an apology. Trump also threatened legal action after the Timespublished and wrote about part of his 1995 tax return.

6. Limit media access. Trump hasn't had a news conference since July. He has blocked the media from traveling with him, or even knowing whom he's meeting with. His phone call with Vladimir Putin, which occurred shortly after the election, was first reported by the Kremlin.

This is highly unusual. In 2000, President-elect George W. Bush called a press conference three days after the Supreme Court determined the outcome of the election. In 2008, President-elect Obama also meet with the press three days after being elected. 

7. Bypass the media and communicate with the public directly. The American public learns what Trump thinks through his tweets. Shortly after the election, Trump released a video message outlining some of the executive actions he plans to take on his first day in office.

Aids say Trump has also expressed interest in continuing to hold the large rallies that became a staple of his candidacy. They say he likes the instant gratification and adulation that the cheering crowds provide.

The word "media" comes from "intermediate" between newsmakers and the public. Responsible media hold the powerful accountable by asking them hard questions and reporting on what they do. Apparently Trump wants to eliminate such intermediaries.

Historically, these seven techniques have been used by demagogues to erode the freedom and independence of the press. Even before he's sworn in, Trump seems intent on doing exactly this.  


Share:

Monday, December 19, 2016

Do you wonder how it happened in Nazi Germany? Read on...

Good article from huffingtonpost.com that won't be seen by Fox news viewers who proudly support Trump.  Sadly, those of his supporters who do see it and read it will not understand it as something relating to themselves.

What Those Who Studied Nazis Can Teach Us About The Strange Reaction To Donald Trump
NEW YORK TIMES CO. VIA GETTY IMAGES
Jewish American political thinker Hannah Arendt, who escaped Germany in 1933, saw the problem as "not what our enemies did, but what our friends did."

On election night, MSNBC's Chris Matthews had a revelation. Matthews, with a pained expression, began to piece together the basis for Hillary Clinton's pending defeat. She had failed to communicate a tough position on illegal immigration. She had supported bad trade deals. She had not renounced all of the "stupid wars."  

Her presidential rival, Donald Trump, on the other hand, had waged what Matthews called a "legitimate" campaign on these issues, a claim that seemed to stretch the bounds of legitimacy, but Matthews was not alone. In the following days and weeks, others would make similar claims implying a victory that, weeks before, had been impossible was actually inevitable ― and liberalism was largely to blame.

People magazine put Trump on its cover in November, a month after one of its journalists, Natasha Stoynoff, accused him of sexually assaulting her in 2005. The magazine's editor-in-chief reassured readers that they stood by their journalist and her allegations, but Trump had "made history" and thus earned the cover.

In a New York Times op-ed, "The End of Identity Liberalism," Mark Lilla argued that "moral panic about racial, gender and sexual identity" had "distorted liberalism's message and prevented it from becoming a unifying force capable of governing." Trump's popularity, Lilla argued, was not a consequence of a white backlash (whitelash) but rather a reaction to "the omnipresent rhetoric of identity or 'political correctness.'"

Michael Lerner, in another New York Times op-ed, "Stop Shaming Trump Voters," argued that "the pain and rage of the Trump voter is legitimate" after decades of this constituency being ignored or attacked by the left for cultural and religious reasons. He added that "we need to reach out to Trump voters in a spirit of empathy and contrition" and reassured us that "the racism, sexism and xenophobia used by Mr. Trump to advance his candidacy does not reveal an inherent malice in the majority of Americans."

These reactions to Trump and his supporters have a way of separating ideas that usually move in tandem. Facts and truth are suddenly unrelated. Power no longer implies responsibility. Legitimacy and decency are now somehow passengers on separate ships. In this dynamic, People magazine can champion both the perpetrator and the victim and see no contradiction or betrayal. Lilla can use the victory of a campaign steeped in identity politics to highlight the ineffectiveness of identity politics. And Lerner can argue that a campaign "advanced" by sexism, racism and xenophobia can tell us much about the targets of that bigotry, i.e. that they need to behave differently, but little about the supporters of that campaign.

So, why the rush to defend Trump's supporters? Why the self-recriminations? Why the willingness to stretch the bounds of legitimacy to accommodate Trump's antics? Much has been written about Trump's demagoguery and its similarity to totalitarian leaders of the past, but what about Trump's opponents? Are many of us borrowing a page from totalitarianism without realizing it? Are we empowering him? Are we coordinating?

The word Gleichshaltung is often translated from the German as "coordination" and refers to the process of ― politically speaking ― getting in line. It often appears in books about the Nazi era. German Jewish philologist Victor Klemperer and German journalist Joachim Fest wrote about the personal cost of coordinating in their respective memoirs. German author Sebastian Haffner and Americans including journalist William Shirer wrote about the propaganda and politics of coordination.   

German-born Jewish political theorist Hannah Arendt, in one of her last interviews, explains it best.

"The problem, the personal problem, was not what our enemies did, but what our friends did. Friends 'coordinated' or got in line." And this coordination was not necessarily due to the "pressure of terror," said Arendt, who escaped Germany in 1933. Intellectuals were particularly vulnerable to this wave of coordination. "The essence of being an intellectual is that one fabricates ideas about everything," and many intellectuals of her time were "trapped by their own ideas."

People rejected the uglier aspects of Nazism but gave ground in ways that ultimately made it successful. They conceded premises to faulty arguments. They rejected the "facts" of propaganda, but not the impressions of it. The new paradigm of authoritarianism was so disorienting that they simply could not see it for what it was, let alone confront it.

Outside of Germany people often wonder at the palpable fraudulence of Nazi propaganda, the stupid incredible exaggerations, the ludicrous reticences concerning what is generally known. Who can be convinced by it? They ask. The answer is that it is not meant to convince but to impress.Sebastian Haffner, in 1940's "Germany: Jekyll and Hyde"

The faulty premise that empowered Hitler and helped place him in the German mainstream was called the Dolchstoss or the legend of the "stab in the back." It argued that, despite all of the evidence to the contrary, Germany was winning World War I only to have politicians surrender prematurely. 

Hitler, as a political figure, was the embodiment of this hack theory. While many rejected Hitler's anti-Semitism and bellicosity, his deep sense of having been wronged by Germany's surrender in World War I ― a war in which he fought ― gave him authenticity. It also created a hole in the German Republic's legitimacy that he and his followers barreled through.

Before there were the camps and murders ― and the euphemisms to hide all of the camps and all of the murders ― there was this feel-good lie that should have been dismissed ― along with the people telling it, from the beginning.

In today's United States, the suggestion that illegal immigration is the cause of the economic struggles of working-class whites is an American Dolchstoss. Mechanization, globalization and the decline of unions have affected working-class whites to a far greater extent than illegal immigration ― or immigration of any kind. And this is not an obscure fact or liberal talking point. Yet many who supposedly reject Trump's scapegoating of illegal immigrants seem willing to concede it. 

The debates about how or what, if anything, workers can do to combat this reality are endless, but the claim that immigrants are to blame is the talking point of the demagogue, not a reflection of economic reality.

When the decline of working-class jobs was perceived as a problem for African-Americans primarily, the neoliberal and conservative positions were much less sympathetic. According to William Julius Wilson's 1996 book, When Work Disappears: The World of the New Urban Poor, "Between 1967 and 1987 Philadelphia lost 64% of its manufacturing jobs; Chicago lost 60%; Detroit 51%." This meant hundreds of thousands of jobs lost, disproportionately affecting African-Americans. The solution from conservatives? "Migrate" was black conservative Shelby Steele's prescription. "Get new skills," said others. And even more popular was "behave more like Asians." Yet whites need an entirely new mythology, even if that mythology hurts prospects. According to a recent Politico article by Dana Goldstein, "America: This Is Your Future," "Rust Belt cities that are attracting immigrants are in better shape than those, like Dayton, Ohio, with fewer foreign-born residents." Yet, "the people who are upset about immigration live in areas where immigration has had very little impact. A lot of the upset is symbolic." The symbolism and the propaganda form a kind of feedback loop, each reinforcing the other, regardless of the underlying truths ― or lack thereof.

In his 1940 book, Germany: Jekyll and Hyde, Haffner explains this relationship between impression and propaganda, even for those opposed to the Reich. He writes, "Outside of Germany people often wonder at the palpable fraudulence of Nazi propaganda, the stupid incredible exaggerations, the ludicrous reticences concerning what is generally known. Who can be convinced by it? They ask. The answer is that it is not meant to convince but to impress. It addresses emotion and fantasy. Nazi propaganda seeks to create in our minds tenacious ideas and fantasies."

In Haffner's time, the tenacious ideas and fantasies were the subhuman images of the Reich's enemies. Many Germans rejected the "facts" of this propaganda: that Czechoslovakia or Poland posed existential threats to Germany and the German people, but the impression of the propaganda remained. "The image," Haffner wrote, "of the Czechs and Poles as a snub-nosed, unpleasant, dwarfish half-ape brandishing a revolver, whip or rubber truncheon at a number of barely clad women, children, and blond men bound to posts." Who could trust such a person? Why risk it?

Trump's propaganda about Mexican rapists and Muslim terrorists operates in a similar way. The informed listener knows that most rapes are committed by perpetrators that are known to the victim. They know that most terrorist attacks in the United States are committed by non-Muslims, but the impression that those groups are not to be trusted ― that to trust them is taking an unnecessary risk ― remains.

The impressions born of the propaganda give birth to discussions that worsen the problem. Commentator Van Jones, for example, debated CNN panelists recently about discrimination against Muslims. To support his argument that Muslims are not the enemy, he cataloged many of the positive attributes of the Muslim community as if Americans that are hostile to Muslims are acting in good faith based on bad information rather than cherry-picking incidents to support their underlying prejudices. Jones reminded viewers and other panelists that Muslims have low crime rates, high educational achievement and high rates of entrepreneurship. The fact that it needs to be said demonstrates the relative power of the people asking the questions to those who must answer. It morphs questions about Muslims into a kind of Muslim Question that exists not to seek answers but to emphasize the otherness of the Muslim community and to limit its rights.

While on the campaign trail in February, Trump urged followers to "knock the hell" out of protesters, promising to pay their legal bills if they were arrested and charged. That same February in Fort Worth, he promised a crowd that he would "open up our libel laws" so that news outlets can be sued for writing "false" or "purposely negative" articles. In July, he urged Russia to interfere in the election on his behalf, later saying he was joking. In September, he urged still other supporters to "monitor" polling stations. In October, he promised when victorious to throw his rival, Hillary Clinton, in jail. And just recently he advocated revoking the citizenship of Americans who burn flags.

So, in the last year, Trump has flirted with or, maybe more his style, groped and pawed at totalitarianism, yet the advice from many is to "give him a chance" ― or to coordinate. 

In 1949, Harvard psychologists James Bruner and Leo Postman performed a study that helps explain the contradiction. Bruner and Postman recruited two dozen college students to participate in a study of perception and expectations. The experiment involved playing cards. Participants were shown a series of cards. Most of them were standard playing cards, but included in the series were several trick card: a black four of hearts, a red six of spades, a red six of clubs, to name a few. Each card was presented, and the participant was instructed to identify it correctly.

There were four possible reactions to the trick cards. The first was "recognition," or describing the trick card accurately. The second was "disruption," or being confused by the card and as a result be unable to describe it. The third option was "compromise," which mixes the incongruities in the cards: the black four of hearts is reported as "grayish"; the red six of spades is reported as "purple."

The fourth and most common reaction by far was "dominance." The participants expected to view a normal series of cards, so when faced with a trick card their minds approximated, and the trick card became the most similar normal card: a red spade was identified as a red heart or diamond; a black heart was identified as a spade.

The report of the study, "On the Perception of Incongruity: A Paradigm," said, "Our major conclusion is that perceptual organization is powerfully determined by expectations built upon past commerce with the environment. When such expectations are violated by the environment, the perceiver's behavior can be described as resistance to the unexpected or incongruous."

The participants could only see what they expected to see. Their minds coordinated. For many Americans, the expectations of the game are divided government, stability and continuity regardless of what the candidate promises. However, if the new regime has embraced authoritarianism, then there will be trick cards in the deck that have to be identified correctly and challenged.

"Patriotism" became a trick card in Klemperer's memoir and study of Nazi language, The Language of the Third Reich. Klemperer wrote of a Jewish neighbor, Frau K, who continued to speak with pride about Germany and the "Fuhrer," despite having been deemed subhuman by the regime. Patriotism and deference to leadership ― respect for the office of the president, as we call it ― might have elevated Frau K in the old paradigm, but in the new one it worsened her condition.

"Divided government" became a trick card in Shirer's 1960 history, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, when Hitler pushed through the Enabling Act and, "In five brief paragraphs," took the power to legislate, approve treaties, and initiate constitutional amendments away from Parliament. A divided government essentially "committed suicide," according to Shirer, and bequeathed its power to a dictator.  

There were many others, but "dominance" made them difficult to recognize. Joachim Fest writes in his memoir Not I, "At first, the countless violations of the law by our new rulers still caused a degree of disquiet. But among the incomprehensible features of those months, my father later recalled, was the fact that soon life went on as if such state crimes were the most natural thing in the world." Those months would turn to years. Not the thousand years that Hitler had predicted, but enough to cause millions of deaths.

We should not waste our time or imaginations trying to reconfigure Trumpism to explain why all of the "good people" supported him. It is more important to see it for what it is and resist. Hopefully, they will join us. If not, it will not be necessary to call them names, they will have named themselves. 


Share: