Spiritual, Communitarian Geek Mulling Culture, Writing, Utopia, & Social Justice - Buy Me a Coffee!
Sponsor Me!
Currently, I'm publishing sporadically (as in, there has been a span of 10 months between the last post and the current post). I'd like to write and publish more. Unfortunately, I'm a super busy person, especially since I work a 9 to 5 job five days a week. If you want to help me free up more time, so I can write and publish more, please buy me a coffee or sponsor me through recurring Patreon payments (so you don't forget!).
Classical liberalism, traditional conservatism, and right-wing libertarianism don't understand individualism. Rather, these ideologies delve into despairing methodological individualism, a belief of not being able to predict the behavior of individuals, especially in large numbers.
Individualism is about appreciating and trying to understand other perspectives, how each individual is a node in a Web of relationships and existence. Each node is influenced by the Web. Each node contributes and builds the Web to the degree they have connection with the Web. The amount, strength, and type (positive/negative) of connections affects the experience that a node has and, in turn, the reaction the node has to the Web.
When connections minimize to none to near none, all the influences lead to loneliness and depression and/or anger. When someone is abandoned, excluded, or attacked, the Web falls toward fraying and destruction, which we all feel. When the Web is strong and supported through all our actions, the Web & the people/nodes who make it feel the connection, the belonging, and the positivity.
And it takes effort. We have to work at it. We need to work to appreciate and understand ourselves, the other nodes/people, and how we make up this Web. It takes effort to communicate our perspective and position. It also takes work to find other perspectives and positions. Reconciling contradictory perspectives can get difficult, especially when our identity has become embedded in a particular way of looking at things. Nonetheless, the effort and work to connect can do so much to push onto being better versions of ourselves while also helping us tap into the Web of relationships and existence. We can feel safe. We can let down our guard. We don't have to act defensively, even as we disagree, debate, and argue over perspectives, facts, and truth.
Arguably, such connections matter the most, as they can lead to connection, fighting loneliness, and even caring so much about the connection that the connection becomes the truth. The connection especially becomes truth as the nodes/people believe in the need to protect the integrity of nodes/people to protect the connections. Without the integrity of others, true connection can't exist; without true connection, other nodes/people can't discover and live their truth. Without true connection, you and I can't discover and live yours and my truth. We may have different truths, but without the acceptance the other truth, we can't accept our own truth.
In other words, without putting in the work and effort to understand, appreciate, and support others, we will surely fall, die, and never have truth.
If you like what you see here and in the past and want to free me up for more, support my endeavors by Buying Me a Coffee or patronizing me via Patreon.
You can also check me out on Twitter at @screwjaw and Mastadon at @screwjaw@mastodon.social for articles, short form stuff, and a higher frequency/volume of opinions and truth!
This is part 4 of I don't how long series of essays that I've titled Redlining Political Communities in Chicago and the United States. The series takes up the topic of two separate racist "encounters" that erupted around one weekend at the end of May 2019 between two business owners in Chicago's boystown and the black LGBTQ+ community of Chicago as a way to analyze how geography and segmenting of populations can influence politics in Chicago and allegorically to the United States.
If you want to catch up and not start in the middle, you can read Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3.
Then again, Lightfoot might go against the grain of her history. A viable profile of Lightfoot's public professional history comes from a combination of
Lacking experience
All of Lightfoot's public experience and power has come from political appointments and hired positions, not elected positions
Being a person with minority/marginalized characteristics in a world of White Straight Male Supremacy
Lightfoot's lack of experience doesn't need much attention. Her time on organizations focused on overseeing the Chicago police force come off as more strategic, tactical, and "by the book" for an appointed position rather than lack of experience. The time as part of these organizations need more attention.
Nonetheless, Lightfoot has two glaring illustrations from further back that show lack of experience need a little attention. They are:
Both of these missteps occurred early in Lightfoot's career. The extradition case proves more understandable. Lightfoot hadn't worked these types of cases much before, and she had worked off the direction and information of her superiors.
The Emergency Management and Communication matter is less forgivable since Lightfoot was the superiod. Also, after coming from a prosecutory career track, Lightfoot should have familiarity with the importance of keeping records for risk management in regard to liability and negligence. Considering all that, however, this appointment comes early during her public service management career track. This department, in particular, comes off as being in shambles even before Lightfoot took lead. Despite the egregiousness of this situation, it creates an impression of a disorganized department led by an inexperienced manager who should have known better but still made mistakes.
Neither of these cases of inexperience have much bearing on the current tensions if any of the sides appeal to Lightfoot. Mayor Lightfoot has reached one of the few top positions in Chicago, so she has only her cognizance to fall back on. The situation in Boystown has more to do with diplomacy but possibly a little coercion or influence peddling, though some amount of investigation, information gathering, and/or ad hoc legislation might be required.
The cases of past inexperience didn't rely so much on Lightfoot's personal execution of values focused on fairness and respect (though having a better grip on such values during those two moments of inexperience could have aided her in doing better jobs) but rather on
Meeting job descriptions
Following the judgment of superiors
Using experience accumulated up to those points
Mayor Lightfoot has a lot more slack to use personal judgment, personal value, and personal discretion while also trying to stay on the good side of voters. In many ways, being mayor provides Lightfoot with more freedom to truly exert some muscle to actualize a positive end result rather than, as in the past, to mitigate harm reduction in a situation.
On the flipside, Lightfoot did a horrible job covering up her screw ups. These instances would have proven impossible to discover at the time if Lightfoot had good cover up skills. If someone in public office wants to cover up misdeeds, I want them bad at doing it.
Inexperienced now covered, onto how being in an appointed position could have given Lightfoot difficulty for showing her convictions.
If you like what you see here and in the past and want to free me up for more, support my endeavors by Buying Me a Coffee or patronizing me via Patreon.
You can also check me out on Twitter at @screwjaw and Mastadon at @screwjaw@mastodon.social for articles, short form stuff, and a higher frequency/volume of opinions and truth!
This is part 3 of how don't how long series of essays that I've titled Redlining Political Communities in Chicago and the United States. The series takes up the topic of two separate racist "encounters" that erupted around one weekend at the end of May 2019 between two business owners in Chicago's boystown and the black LGBTQ+ community of Chicago as a way to analyze how geography and segmenting of populations can influence politics in Chicago and allegorically to the United States.
If you want to catch up and not start in the middle, you can read Part 1 first and also Part 2.
In addition to taking into account the influence of the Black LGBTQ+ voting bloc on Mayor Lightfoot, an appeal to the Mayor in this case might have an additional factor that could benefit the Black LGBTQ+ community. Mayor Lightfoot is the first openly gay and first female black mayor of Chicago. Mayor Lightfoot has something of a personal stake in this conflict and getting it resolved in a manner that benefits both her intersectional identity and advancing society seeing, hearing, and respecting marginalized identities could attract her. Lightfoot's identification with the cause and embodiment with the cause on a macro level could push her to take action.
However, two factors work against having faith that Mayor Lightfoot would take up this cause: her public history and she is the mayor to the whole city, not just one voting bloc or community. Lightfoot ran for mayor on a platform of police reform. A fair amount of the public instantly had thoughts about police murdering black people with minimal, if any, cause, after which the perpetrators often received minimal, if any, repercussions. While serving as something of a watchdog over the police in her pre-Mayoral career, though, Lightfoot hadn't shown the most empathy or urgency to families and victims, giving preference to order and prudence:
Mayor Lightfoot answers to a different calling than emphasizing her own identifications and emphasizing her own personal/social justice. She comes from a marginalized background in which she learned to “not to use her race, gender, or economic status as an excuse for anything short of excellence.” This approach becomes a double-edged sword. It values truth and equal treatment while being a leader to everyone.
At the same time, however, this perspective can cause a blindness to identifying when discretion in unique situations can
Increase equitable justice
Smooth relations
Build trust and good will
Use/take advantage of learning moments
Maintaining order and emphasizing equal reward for equal effort, however, can often maintain the status quo and intensify tensions and bad faith between parties.
In regards to these two particular issues, the rap ban and a prejudiced store owner in Boystown, Mayor Lightfoot would likely not consider them high ranking on her list of priorities. Lightfoot has mentioned many times how she wants to prioritize developing run down parts of the city with little commercial or community activity. Taking into consideration the increased violence in the city since Memorial Day, Lightfoot likely sees crime as a problem to fix, too. Add to that Lightfoot’s trips to California, Washington DC, and New York City to try brainstorming ideas to fight crime and violence (and be on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert), these problems might not impress Lightfoot as important issues that will help bolster her approval among the voters.
Part 4 has been completed and posted! Please feel free to move onto the next parts.
If you like what you see here and in the past and want to free me up for more, support my endeavors by Buying Me a Coffee or patronizing me via Patreon.
You can also check me out on Twitter at @screwjaw and Mastadon at @screwjaw@mastodon.social for articles, short form stuff, and a higher frequency/volume of opinions and truth!
This is part 2 of how don't how long series of essays that I've titled Redlining Political Communities in Chicago and the United States. The series takes up the topic of two separate racist "encounters" that erupted around one weekend at the end of May 2019 between two business owners in Chicago's boystown and the black LGBTQ+ community of Chicago as a way to analyze how geography and segmenting of populations can influence politics in Chicago and allegorically to the United States.
If you want to catch up and not start in the middle, you can read Part 1 first. Part 3 has been completed and posted! Please feel free to move onto the next parts.
Clout and leverage, in the context of this situation, refers to direct, in the open, obvious characteristics like residents of a neighborhood that can vote for the local alderman (the current legal title in Chicago, even for women or other genders), having a business that likely contribute campaign funds to the alderman, or possibly advocating with their own alderman and/or mayor, indirectly or directly.
Advocating through the mayor probably provides the most direct access to "honest" clout in this situation. Every vote for the mayor helps Mayor Lori Lightfoot, whereas the alderman, Tom Tunney, alderman for the 44th ward 44th where these conflicts have occurred, doesn't depend on votes from residents of other wards.
Gender identities not taken into account in these surveys but who participate in these communities
The intersection of race and sexual identity
I feel safe to say that the members of the aggressed upon group, Black LGBTQ+, probably still amount to somewhere between 3% to 4%. Either which way, when looked upon from a pure numbers perspective, this group doesn’t come off as a strong voting bloc.
The above analysis makes sense in a winner take all election system with few candidates. However, The Black LGBTQ+ voting bloc can gain more traction when taking into account a combination of the Chicago municipal electoral system and the size of the candidate pool. Chicago has two-step runoff elections if a single candidate doesn't get more than 50% of the vote during the first round of the election. If no candidate gets the majority vote, the candidates with the two highest whole percentage scores end up on the final ballot. The final ballot has likely never had more than two candidates, but in theory, it could happen.
In the last Chicago Municipal Elections, the first round ballot had 21 or 22 mayoral candidates. At the end of the first Election Night, front runners Lori Lightfoot got 17.54% of the vote and Toni Preckwinkle got 16.04%, granting them entry into the second round ballot. Bill Daley, the candidate that came in 3rd, got 14.78% of the vote. Making a non real-world assumption for illustrative purposes that Black LGBTQ+ Chicagoans didn't vote at all, if the estimated percentage of Black LGBTQ+ voters all voted for Daley (which I doubt they would), compared to the total population of Chicago without taking into account voter participation, Daley's percentage would have gotten up to 17.78%, taking first place knocking Preckwinkle out of the second-round race.
The numbers become even more interesting when taking into account that the first round of the election only had 35% voter participation. If the voter participation remained the same but the Black LGBTQ+ bloc was switched out with a completely different demographic, this community could swing the vote by approximately 8%. This calculated makes an assumption that a minimal amount of Black LGBTQ+ constituents voted in the actual election (these calculations are to illustrate a point, not make an argument about a voter blocs voter participation).
Adding in all the 3% African American LGBTQ+ participation to the 35% voter participation rather than switching them out with voters would increase participation to 38%, the African American LGBTQ+ community could still swing the vote by 7.89% if they voted as a single bloc in this situation. If this whole bloc had voted for the candidate in 5th place, Susana Mendoza, she would have come in second, either knocking out Preckwinkle OR taken part in the second round ballot as third candidate (again, a theoretical possibility that I don't have enough data to truly understand).
These calculations and argument don't aim to push for any particular candidate or make an argument about the participation of real people or real voting blocs in the election (since I don't know how the participation breaks down demographic wise). Rather, these premises aim to argue that votes matter, especially when consolidated into a voting bloc and when a lot of candidates run without political party monopolies. Black and brown people, Jewish people, LGBTQ+ people, working class people, women, and whatever category that goes unmentioned here are not monoliths. Nonetheless, when White Supremacy, implicit or explicit, erases and silences communities and groups because they express harmless but beautiful characteristics that Supremacists don't like, these communities sometimes need to come together as a voting bloc or group of voting blocs to fight as a group so that each individual can be heard and seen.
As to Lightfoot, advocating a cause to her with 3% to 8% of the voters makes for a good realpolitik defensive poltical position for her in a future "election brawl". The additional voter share would better bolster her chances of winning as any additional votes would. In addition, keeping those votes away from other candidates weakens the other candidates' positions for receiving a "referendum" and developing momentum to challenge Lightfoot as much. Mayor Lightfoot also wouldn't have to divide her attention as much during the campaign if she gains the appreciation and gratitude of a voting block while continuing to deliver to that voting bloc.
By the numbers, a voter share of 3% to 8% can still amount to a lot when the election field reaches a large enough size. The numbers provide a good argument for the Black LGBTQ+ voter bloc advocating their cause with Mayor Lightfoot.
But what about other, softer factors and characteristics could win or lose Mayor Lightfoot for this cause?
Part 3 and Part 4 have been completed and posted! Please feel free to move onto the next parts.
If you like what you see here and in the past and want to free me up for more, support my endeavors by Buying Me a Coffee or patronizing me via Patreon.
You can also check me out on Twitter at @screwjaw and Mastadon at @screwjaw@mastodon.social for articles, short form stuff, and a higher frequency/volume of opinions and truth!
This is part 1 of how don't how long series of essays that I've titled Redlining Political Communities in Chicago and the United States. The series takes up the topic of two separate racist "encounters" that erupted around one weekend at the end of May 2019 between two business owners in Chicago's boystown and the black LGBTQ+ community of Chicago as a way to analyze how geography and segmenting of populations can influence politics in Chicago and allegorically to the United States.
Part 2 and Part 3 have been completed and posted! Please feel free to move onto the next parts.
About 3 weeks ago, two racist conflicts arose that centered around the Boystown neighborhood in Chicago that the following three articles elaborate upon:
During the week afterward, at least one community group largely made up of the group effected, Black LGBTQ+ people, had two events to start addressing the conflict:
An education/information rally in a neighborhood parking lot
A brainstorming/planning meeting at a church in an adjacent neighborhood
I participated in the meeting later in the week at the church. A striking phenomenon became apparent at this meeting: most of the people at the meeting didn't have obvious clout in the neighborhood (not being residents, not being business owners). However, these effected people had skin in the game, having contributed and continue to contribute to the LGBTQ+ community in Boystown. Many at the meeting expressed that they had gotten so much emotional support from Boystown that these two racist conflicts felt like a huge betrayal and made these people question what they gave to and have gotten from Boystown.
These feelings from the aggressed against the aggressors has validity and lie on the right side of the conflict. Nonetheless, these people have minimal local neighborhood clout since they don't live there. The aggressors, on the other hand, have clout as a business and a possible neighborhood resident. The only recourse for the aggressed upon seems to be:
A legal appeal to a higher power (the city, the state, and/or even the country since this could be considered a civil rights violation, at least in a more sensical age)
A public relations/moral suasion approach
The meeting didn't discuss legal appeals much. At least two people, however, sounded like they came from a City of Chicago department that addresses these types of issues and volunteered to discuss legal and advocacy options. A general consensus existed that legal options for these two conflicts would take awhile and, to some degree, would likely happen. Legal appeals, however, probably wouldn't need or allow the assistance of everyone who want to express their anger and sadness through action, and who want to make a difference.
These people who wouldn't have involvement in the legal fight would need to get involved in the political public relations/moral suasion campaign. This approach begs a question: Without political clout or any obvious leverage, how does this community (Black LGBTQ+) within a community (larger LGBTQ+ community, especially those who patronize Boystown establishments) push for their inclusion and to be taken seriously as a group and individuals that should be seen and heard?
I should have posted this Part 1 last week. The whole concept felt a lot simpler in my head than it has come out so far in my drafting. As things stand now, Part 2 could be lengthy with a portion of some wonky strategic political and public relations stuff. Writing it has taken a few days of random bits of empty time while on buses, at lunch, etc. etc. I don't know how long this series of essays will be. Please stay tuned to see where it will go!
Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4 have been completed and posted! Please feel free to move onto the next parts.
If you like what you see here and in the past and want to free me up for more, support my endeavors by Buying Me a Coffee or patronizing me via Patreon.
You can also check me out on Twitter at @screwjaw and Mastadon at @screwjaw@mastodon.social for articles, short form stuff, and a higher frequency/volume of opinions and truth!
I've started writing a pretty wonky and lengthy analysis about affecting structural change through politics, culture, and markets in reaction to a concentration of intersectional conflict that occurred in my neighborhood about a week and half ago. You will need to wait until next week or so to delve into the wonkiness.
For now, though, here are the articles I provide in the essay that provide descriptions of the conflicts and some context to the conflicts:
If you like what you see here and in the past and want to free me up for more, support my endeavors by Buying Me a Coffee or patronizing me via Patreon.
You can also check me out on Twitter at @screwjaw and Mastadon at @screwjaw@mastodon.social for articles, short form stuff, and a higher frequency/volume of opinions and truth!
Fascinating thing about all the high profile candidates on the Left: they all have some mark against them that they have to deal with. Their pasts show
That people can change
People don't always have control of their organizations
that social norms have changed FAST
But how do we evaluate these candidates' history and whether they meet the standards of "woke enough" essentially, whether it be about their
Rhetoric
Language
Evolving beliefs
The people around them
The ability to develop a "woke" organization
I'm guessing the last factor of developing a "woke" organization can play a big part, considering our current POTUS and the scandal upon scandal upon scandal. Even if we remove campaign scandals, the development and churn of Trump's
Advisers
Cabinet heads
Department heads
has been atrocious. Trump, on his own, doesn't have consistency and stability on his list of virtues. Quite the opposite, in fact. Trump, his cronies, and his judicial appointments also practically provides the illustration in the dictionary for "not woke" (though Mitch McConnell can't be excluded when discussing judicial appointments).
Suffice to say, watching the arguments and discussions on the Left of how to evaluate the candidates for the 2020 Primaries and Election will provide a fascinating case study in social, cultural, and political development. I appreciate Stacey Abram's entrance into this arena by stating that Democrats Will Win In 2020 ‘By Telling Our Story,’ Not Running Against Trump, but I'm sure many on the Left will have their opinions about how this discourse will
Develop
Have norms and 'rules' of its own
Result after all is said and done
I welcome thoughts and input on this discourse in the comments section of this entry and future comments that touch on this discourse. Feel free to provide your input as you see fit.
If you like what you see here and in the past and want to free me up for more, support my endeavors by Buying Me a Coffee!
Has the divide in the Left between the socialists and the pluralists risen again since the the midterm election? And has the Right been taking advantage of this rift to split them, especially in attempt to make them unattractive to the Center?
Social media provided me an initial glimpse with an out of proportion reaction to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and me:
Been asking myself that for the last week. Then I realized that Trump doesn't want to let anyone in (unless they're rich & white).
that’s not true typical name calling when no valid facts present themselves you socialists are evil and too stupid to realize that what happens after socialism is mass murder always
Other than beng a reaction against Ocasio-Cortez, raising the topic of socialism gives an incongruous impression. What does socialism have to do with the border? Also, the statement about socialism leading to mass murder comes off as specious and misunderstanding that differences exist between the Democratic Socialism that we see in Europe today and Cult of Personality Communism of Lenin/Stalin, Mao, the Kim family, and various other instances in the past. Socialism and Communism don't equate to totalitatarianism, dictatorship and mass murder.
This incongruousness sent me to the Internet try finding an explanation to this kind of reaction. I think I glimpsed a whole bunch of other remarks like this about socialism on social medias over the last few weeks. Articles like these resulted from the searching:
Apparently I've been behind on seeing attempts at the Rightist rhetoric against Obama by the Right that tried to paint Obama as some evil socialist that threatened America.
Last night I walked into a gathering of friends that were obviously talking about politics from how the conversation ended. The one black guy among a bunch of white guys said, "Yeah, I get what you're saying, but I'm a black guy and I'm scared of the Right."
The conversation ended there, but as someone who puts Pluralism first and am experimentally supportive of more socialist schemes, I was confused. Not by the black friend, but by all the other friends in the room. I believe they are anti-Trump and that they appreciate the balance that the new House will bring. . .but I don't know, it's confusing to me. Once politics regress to the mean, how much people with privilege have the willingness to entertain a path that could lead to more control y a political party willing to support a fatuous demagogue, voter suppression, confirming the nominations of judges willing to all drastic change and disrespect of people, confirmation the nominations of cabinet members and department heads looking to destroy their departments, engage in corrupt spending of money, mangle facts and ignore scientific data, and willing to allow the destruction of human civilization, violation of human rights, and destruction of the Affordable Care Act with a million more little cuts?
Why would anyone be OK with enabling this destruction and disrespect?
I wracked my brain. Considering my friend based his argument to vote liberal on a social issue, that left another major issue that could scare people tending to the Center: the economic/socialist platform that has become associated with the Democrats through the Democratic Socialist wing. This article does an interesting job riling up the fears of Democratic Socialism: Democratic Socialism Threatens Minorities. I don't agree with this guy's argument, but it does illustrate the attempt to divide the socialism and pluralism sides of the Left.
Articles exist out there about how "identity politics" leads to people adopting group identities and destroying equal-rights individualism, of which this nation is based on. I found them randomly before, but I took hours to find this one: It Is Time to Debate-And End-Identity Politics at The Heritage Foundation. Interestingly enough, this article makes a connection between racial activism in the past with Marxism, which feels like a deep dive.
The Right, in its desire to hurt the Left, and the Center Left, in attempts to appeal to the Center, have taken some multi-pronged attacks. The Right has both united the pluralism/socialism stances into a unitary threat AND has also pegged them as separate menaces. Uniting the stances scares their supporters and those in the center inclined to triggering. Pegging them as separate menaces divides the Left, setting the Left to argue with itself over which issues will supposedly win elections and the hearts of the American people. The Right divides and conquers the Left while scaring the Center and their own Right the both pluralism and socialism are threats.
If the Right is pulling these rhetorical flourishes that divides the Left, how can the Left do better to realize what Ocasio-Cortez once said that economic justice and social justice aren't separate things? And once the Left can unite these issues and unite itself under multiple causes for justice, how can it demonstrate and convince the People that the Left will be able to address the issues that the nation faces?
I don't have any clear answers. This essay focused more about raising questions. My next essay might have something to add to the issues to connect with the People, though: National Pride.
If you like what you see here and in the past and want to free me up for more, support my endeavors by Buying Me a Coffee!
I've taken out three to four of his books from the library and looked more into his thought on the Internet, (though I haven't yet started the books). In what I've seen and heard from him so far, though, I'm a little disappointed.
Then again, I've been disappointed a little, in general, with thought in positions of pluralism and the importance of thinking independently, openly, and empathetically, though I support these causes 100%. To be frank, I also feel disappointed by most positions out there in the present day, Far Leftist, liberal, conservative, or Far Rightist.
I have problems with assumption of correctness without building up a basis for the correctness. Even the Rawlsian"Veil of Ignorance" argument for coming up with equal rights blindly without knowing your position in the world still feels somewhat shallow. Even then, I'm sure after the veil has been pulled away, people with unfair advantage will try to push for more advantage. Some type of logical fallacy must exist regarding the veil.
So this phenomena leads me to a flipside of questions: if these tools can be used for good without understanding them, couldn't the phenomena be used in a similar fashion for evil? Shouldn't we work harder to understand these underlying causes and sources? Shouldn't we understand what human factors lead us to be manipulated, lead us to adopt Lakoff's Strict Father or Indulgent Mother models?
Sometimes it feels like Lakoff, many academics, and all of us in our politics, depend on the elegance and coherence of arguments and narratives to convince people. If people simply don't accept the argument, then we dismiss as ignorant or as adopting the wrong side of the argument. In the case of Lakoff's models, they have adopted the "Strict Father" (since Lakoff demonizes those who do).
Now, I'm coming from a difficult position. I believe in
Pluralism
Fairness
Empathy
Open mindedness
Ppenness to experience and
Against true systemic unfair advantages/privilege and will fight tooth and nail to protect them
At the same time, to fight tooth and nail, I want to have good back up to the causes I'm fighting for. I want an understanding of human nature, tendency, instinct, and inborn causes that bring about these reactions in people. I'll fight without good back up, but I still want the back up.
Hopefully, through this understanding, I can show the other side their incorrectness and that they're hurting themselves by not standing down. Their persistance to continue in their ways of hate and pain hurts them. Even take the standoff of terrorism and civilization. I don't like to go back to pinning down the rise of cycles of hate, anger, and violence down to some historical point. After all, it's possible to go even further back to reach another historical point to show the injustice of that original historical point. It's called a cycle for a reason.
Rather, though, investigating the human reactions to these historical points that reverbate further and further back in time and investigating how those historical points have fired up human instinct to start cycles that cause so much damage and hate can help show us
The positives and negatives of actions taken
How they can be self destructive to
The self
The community
Civilization
Earth
If we understand where we have come from, we can break out of our cycles.
I am a Unitarian Universalist, not a Christian, so I tend to appreciate texts and ideas from multiple different heritages in all of human history. Some text from Paul's letter to the Romans has always stuck me since I had read it:
I cut a bunch from the quote. I'm not so into the divine and theological interpretation of the text, even though that's the origin of it. Rather, if you replace "God" with "understanding", "human nature", or "reality" (which, obviously, Christians will argue is blasphemous), I believe the text better fits my approach.
I like to think that if we can figure out a good interpretation of the original causes of human behavior, we may not need the laws created by politicians. These lawas were created at a time when one partisan side had the power vs when another side was out of power. For instance, I'm coming to appreciate a constant between all sides of conflict in humanity: we all have an instinct for "fairness".
Yet we have different interpretations of what fairness means because of our position in the disagreement. If we can figure out some basic premises of how the human instinct of "fairness" works, including how different individuals and groups interpret the application of fairness, we can have a better idea of how to extrapolate and reason out how to act without needing to remember rote legislated laws.
And if there's an existing cycle of conflict, maybe we can figure out how to get out of the cycle in a way that satisfies all sides. Getting out might even require one or all sides to feel and accept guilt, but to do so in a way that they accept their part in contributing to the cycle of anger, hate, bigotry hurt, and even violence.
In the current atmosphere of politics in the United States, I urge our politicians to behave civilly and engage in a due process that respects impact and unveiling undue advantage. I also urge our politicians to figure out better ways to get a better tab on their consituents, electorate, and the facts, considering
Since Congress, especially the Republican establishment (whatever that means these days), can't seem to get it through their heads that they have lost touch with the country, you won't find me telling everyday people to be civil. The United States government is supposed to be "government of the people, by the people, for the people" (interestingly, our heritage has gotten that from John Wyckliffe). If politicians won't do the work to find out what the people think and feel, then the people of America need to make sure we let the politicians know how we think and feel (even if that means to happen in public, in an elevator in governmental buildings, in restaurants, in town halls, etc.).
Nonetheless, whether one group or another should act civilly or not, we should all seek to
Understand the nature of the phenomena behind us
Figure out why we and others behave the way that they do
See how our current trends are destroying us, even though we believe it's saving us
If we continue with this partisan cycle, we're going to do destroy ourselves and the world. On the other hand, if we can understand our human nature, we can hopefully break out of this cycle and figure out how to prevent such cycles in the future (including preventing genocide).
Who's with me on this one?
If you like what you see here and in the past and want to free me up for more, support my endeavors by Buying Me a Coffee!
I think I've been procrastinating on thinking about politics or getting involved too much in poltical discussions and arguments since returning from the 1-1/2 week trip to California a couple weeks ago (though I plan on posting some ruminations about regionalism and some videos of the landscape at some point, but that requries some sound editing). I only just caught up on local Chicago and Illinois politics over at the Chicago Tribune Clout Street section (the Chicago mayoral race has gotten crazy since Rahm declined to participate in the election). The podcasts have piled up a bit, but I'm making headway there.
This procrastination has a little more psychology to it, though. Part of me doesn't want to move past the Primaries and the 2018 General Election. Or a better alternative: fast forwarding my perception of time until the hands of government change drastically. Now sucks, I miss the old days when the United States government and the Western world felt sane, but I feel like things will get even more crazy and even more tense after the 2018 General Election.
The 2020 Presidential Election cycle will start, along with the 2020 House elections (2-year terms now feels like a breakneck pace, now that I've learned about it and have come to actually pay attention to the House), and also some of the 2020 Senate races. The Chicago mayoral race with the initial run-off election in February will feel somewhat like a pleasant diversion (and a follow up race later if one candidate doesn't get at least 50% of the vote, which I doub will happen). The 2020 races will start on November 7, and with Trump at the head of the GOP, all this shit will explode get even worse. Hopefully some other Republican(s) will run, too, and help to dampen Trump's impact.
Either which way, I expect the rhetoric and attacks to get tense, rapid fire, ugly, and even more divisive. The effects could expand further out from just rhetoric to action, which could get worse than ugly. Dang, I didn't even think about attacks on the media, social media scrutiny, and tampering in the US Elections, both from the aftermath of Election 2018 and the attempts to further secure and desecuritize Election 2020. Let's not forget voter and turnout suppression, either!
Admittedly, I've all but determined where my votes go in November. I expect to vote the first weekend that early voting becomes available in my district/precinct. I'll just want to get it over with, like tearing off a Band-Aid (TM).
While waiting for that day to come, though, part of me wants to avoid politics and news. That part of me just wants to pamper myself in escapism and enjoyable things. My sensible side, however, tells me not to succumb to this thinking, laziness, and lack of participation. I might enjoy myself by relaxing during these days of relative calm before the storm of the 2020 Election that will start in a little less than 50 days. I might become complacent, especially not good because I have that luxury.
I need to get my ass more into gear. I need to get my politics and news bandwidth open again. Things need to change. The present state of things is not tolerable. Eligible voters need more urging to get out to their polling places, whether through their own initiative or, if within my power, with the assistance of others that can help voters get to their polling places. Even though Trump's approval has declined below 40% again and the generic polls have stayed relatively steady (but still scary close), we can't take those polls for granted. Those polls don't become reality unless we get out there to vote.
So I need to get my ass into gear more to become active and facilitate other people's activity. I need to shake this funk. Come me, let's do this! Let's get into action and raise motivation among the people. Let's "be the change I want to see in the world." Let's revive hope again. I can do this, and so can you!
In Germany, the persecution of Jews was official government policy and had evolved gradually during the years when the Nazi regime attained the height of its popularity and power. Here, unlike conquered or satellite states, the assault on the Jews could not be discredited as a program imposed by a victorious foreign tyrant or enacted to ingratiate a dominant ally. Any German opposition to the persecution of the Jews was interpreted as a form of treason. This does not mean that most Germans shared Hitler's racism and sought the physical annhilation of European Jewry. Instead, the accepted anti-Semitic discrimination as just one plank in the Nazi platform for the restoration of German power. Their support for the Third Reih was predicated on Hitler's overall success in overcoming the civil strife and depression that plagued Germany in the early 1930s and in freeing Germany from the shackles of the Treaty of Versailles had clamped on the country's irredentist and military aspirations. When Hitler succeeded in achieving these goals between 1933 and 1941, the suffering of the Jews seemed to be either a necessary or small price to pay for this national revival.
I've changed from Twittervism to MastoTwittervism because I want to switch over most of my social media activity to Mastodon. I appreciate, though don't fully understand the implications, the Federalism of Mastodon and also like that some Instances (servers) feel comfortable to assert more moderation than Facebook or Twitter, willing to take action against harassers, hateful, and abusive people. Mods and admins have a bit of learning and figuring out to do, but I like the idea and spirit.
The main worry/drawback at the moment: I don't have too many friends, acquaintences and/or followers using Mastodon. I had a lot of hope for Google Plus and the social media system they tried launching before that, but neither of them worked. Mastodon feels the same, but I think a fair amount of people feel excited about it, too, especially regarding the assertiveness that we hope the mods and admins feel and will act upon. Their presence and willingness to act feels more reassuring than the behavior that Facebook and Twitter will tolerate and neglect these two platforms present. Like voting, however, Mastodon won't amount to much unless people adopt the system and migrate over to it.
With that in mind, please do some research and come on over to join the party. I hang out over at mastodon.social with user name @screwjaw. If you have an account at another Instance/server that hasn't muted/blocked my instance, you can still connect with me at @screwjaw@mastodon.social. From what I've, though, even if your Instance mutes my Instance/server, you might still have the ability to follow me and vice versa. Come on over to the Mastodon side and hang out!
Theory about Trump & supporters: Trump is bigotted toxic narcissist; his follwers are closet narcissists who glom onto Trump's ego for self confidence. Narcissists mold reality around them.
Interesting take that could have something to it, especially considering libertarian strain that voters of today seem to have (voters want more say, but they hate the partisanship).
The United States needs more bureaucracy, not less - The Washington Posthttps://t.co/yPnlEA4ol5
Interesting story regarding the perspective of the low-level bureaucrats we encounter everyday.
Why Bureaucrats Don't Seem to Care: A researcher’s reflection on eight months of observing workers at an anti-poverty agency - The Atlantichttps://t.co/ReXr9wUiZb
Police Defend Use Of ‘Bait Trucks’ On Chicago’s South Side: ‘No One Touches It, No One Gets Locked Up,’ Officer Says (VIDEO) – Block Club Chicago https://t.co/rVyZmlOqDn
#PluralismTrack This essay really does touch on pluralism, or when pluralism is violated, when a violator is looking for group absolution & group solidarity.
Complications Ensue: The Crafty TV and Screenwriting Blog: Monologuing https://t.co/Lj7HpbCi4P
The Communal Narcissist: Another Wolf Wearing a Sheep Outfit: One reason there's often in-fighting when you're working for a cause. - Psychology Todayhttps://t.co/qndsA0d2JU
Today a federal judge ordered the Trump Administration to bring back a deported mother and daughter who reported fleeing horrific sexual abuse and death threats, yet were hastily removed while their cases were pending.
Clerk reportedly calls cops on student for being 'arrogant and black' https://t.co/A566MgbEop We've now reached the "Well he didn't know his place" aka #UppityWhileBlack & I need this to stop.
JB Pritzker really isn't my first (Pawar) or second pick (Kennedy) for governor, but he'll be better than Rauner. I also appreciate that he's supporting down & horizontal ticket Dem candidates. Was going to say build up party in Illinois, but IL one of few places it's not a prob.
Then throw in timing, possible Blue Wave, health insurance rates being released at some point before election, & also additional tariffs & other things that should be dropping soon before election, incl re: Iran. Tense tight rope with less than 100 days.
How much did 30 white supremacists cost DC? At least $2.6M.
But Metro elevators are consistently out for disabled folks, homeless folks don’t have places to go, folks need meds, there aren’t enough mental health services, pot holes everywhere, affordable housing is disappearing. https://t.co/rI6umpKpVc
Are voters who self suppress their vote suffering from learned helplessness rather than making a rational decision? Are they having over their empowerment & empowerment of their fellow citizens?
Prisoners being forced to fight fires in CA & prisoners protesting/striking over forced labor got me thinking, how much is Far Right looking to enslave migrants? It's OK if Far Right makes $$$?
I’m Phuong. I dream of the same world. I grew up in Iowa where no one could pronounce my name. By the time I wanted to be Viet, I was ostracized for not being Viet enough. I still struggle w identity. I stand with you. https://t.co/7ylveojcfz
#PluralismTrack Can't say I get this essay, & the essay feels clumsy. Nonetheless, such execution feels appropriate to returning to work after a week and a half of vacation.
The Experience of Pluralism - Society for the Advancement of American Philosophyhttps://t.co/dKUr1io1go
#PluralismTrack I have yet to see or hear this Mastodon instance enforce their conduct (been on for less than a day), but they're pretty good in writing: no Nazi behavior, no discrimination, no harassment, no violence.https://t.co/egmP1i421Z - Mastodon
Incarcerated human beings in the U.S. who are supposed to still have human rights have been compelled to organize a prison strike across the country for minimum human dignity against slavery. This kind of alternative information is being criminalized as "disinformation."
#PluralismTrack Interview gets little long, but it has some interesting ideas, 1 or 2 that I had thought about. Enough interesting ideas that I've asked library to hold it.
#PluralismTrack This essay addresses benefits of "feeling understood" on a more personal level, but pluralism needs to be addressed on a personal, non-tokenizing, level, too.
Feeling Understood — Even More Important Than Feeling Loved? - Psychology Todayhttps://t.co/Y3DHGplPdo
Imagine if women were voting en masse against men’s reproductive rights. Men don’t fully grasp how fucked it is to see this over and over again - year after year - decade after decade. We are people. We are not yours to decide what to do with. Our bodies are not your property. https://t.co/y0oXKWgEBJ
Yeh, American Revolution was definitely about generally more petty concerns than overarching colonialism. Southern colonies wanted to expand further west, Northern colonies wanted to expand business. . .maybe the mid-Atlantic colonies had more pretension of principle, but yeh.
Or volunteer. Some people don't have the cash or credit but have time. I know I've maxed out my donating, but I've been texting for Beto this weekend & handwriting some postcards for an Election here in Illinois.
@DailyZeitgeist Stock buybacks = tax rebated raking money in for employees paid options/futures/stock. Capital gains taxed lower than work income. Low taxes for both sides, cheats government & people who need social services, etc. Side steps regulations on high income earners.
— Destiny's Diversity Hire™ ??????? (@RandyS0725) August 27, 2018
In his resignation letter, the nation's top official overseeing the student loan market says the White House has "betrayed (borrowers) and sacrificed the financial futures of millions of Americans in communities across the country."
When a young man responds to his loss in a video game tournament by calmly gunning down his competitors, there is a problem with violent male entitlement and the coping mechanisms normalized by its toxicity.
The federal government said schools reported 235 shootings in one school year. But an NPR investigation finds that more than two-thirds of these reported incidents never happened. https://t.co/5AxSOJKoR6
Now I said long ago, and again at the head of this thread, that we're past the point of "first they came for". For most of the people reading this, they're still not up to "they came for me", and probably won't be for a while. They're working to expand the ranks of "non-American"
You know why "everything" tastes like chicken? It isn't everything, it's just all the animals that have dinosaurs as ancestors. Technically they all taste like dinosaur.
Why does Fox feel that this is something to report on? I could understand if some fan did, but why Fox? I can imagine nefarious reasons, but so left field.
I’m not beating myself up, actually - I’m very happy with the story, don’t think I did anything wrong. Just didn’t expect the president to smear Bloomberg reporters rather than me, and want to deal with it. https://t.co/84NFGqiPay
It’s amazing how people said that Ariana’s dress was too short without knowing much about Aretha or how much she valued women’s bodily autonomy and integrity. #ArethaHomegoingpic.twitter.com/EsWHJOa7TM
BTW, I agree with you that Trump & his cronies have hurt much of the employee, unemployed, & lower classes. I may not agree with your evaluation of extent, but I agree that Trump is injurious of all sorts, & I'm not going to argue over who has it worse or better. Discussion. . .
In the past week, I've seen various iterations of two different but connected conversations. Specifically, "women, people of color, and people who are not cis/straight are discouraged in STEM fields" and "women, POC, and queer people don't REALLY like geeky things."
White supremacists will gloat at “liberal snowflakes”who couldn’t handle Bannon. White liberals will say variation of this.For them it’s a visit to the “marketplace of ideas” that costs them nothing.For us people or colour, Muslims, LGBTQ, disabled people,it is our lives at stake pic.twitter.com/lNHXVPWyhI
If you think special issues like Disabled People Destroy Science Fiction are important, please consider supporting Uncanny Magazine! There are many ways to become a Space Unicorn! https://t.co/2K6taIeOEgpic.twitter.com/6zkY7uOgdU
Most people wouldn’t buy a used car without checking the full vehicle history report. Yet Republicans are pressuring us to accept Brett Kavanaugh as a replacement for Justice Anthony Kennedy without letting us check his full record. America could get taken for a ride.
If you’re burning your Nikes to “support veterans” instead of GIVING them to homeless veterans whose health care Trump degraded, then maybe it’s time to question what you’re REALLY so upset about.
The future of the ACA and coverage for pre-existing conditions are at stake with the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh – and his views on this landmark law are clear. #WhatsAtStakepic.twitter.com/QBgnlTGOCm
Trump is a product of the American people. The behavior of American people isn't a product of Trump. Yes, we have to work to fix the mess, but we also have to acknowledge that we created this mess, & there's about 25%-50% of the country that have truly malignant motivations.
These is real life (or death for a good amount of people). Maybe to the Establishment politicians, it feels like it's just partisanship (I know in my encounter with an Establishment Dem US Rep, they focused a lot more on process & influence more than vision & mission), but to. .
. .many residents & citizens, this is life & death. Heck, for families that want to become residents & citizens, it's life, death, & lifelong psychological trauma. Maybe to politicians, it's all a game of power & one upmanship, but to many on the street, it's real life.
‘Virtue signalling’ is a cowardly term used by people who secretly worry that their beliefs and actions are unethical and don’t want you to make them feel bad by behaving differently. Don’t fall for it. Nobody should feel ashamed of trying to do good in the world.
These are the 4 documents marked committee confidential that I brought up in my questioning of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh last night --> https://t.co/2RZkY2FS9a
We did it, Michigan! @Promote_VoteMI has been officially APPROVED by the Michigan Board of State Canvassers to appear on the Nov. 6 General Election ballot.
I know there’s a lot of breaking news, but don’t let this fly under the radar: Trump is still imprisoning children they so cruelly ripped away from their parents in violation of court orders - and now they’re trying to circumvent 20 years of child welfare & treatment standards. https://t.co/s58z1d0I51
Thank you @SenBlumenthal. This is #WhatsAtStake: People's lives. Kavanaugh is a threat to the Affordable Care Act and could make it impossible for people with pre-existing conditions to get affordable health insurance. We can't go back. #StopKavanaughpic.twitter.com/hlD5tJ7wR4
We cannot go back to the days when women were criminalized for making decisions about their own bodies, insurance companies could deny you health care, or when being a mother was a pre-existing condition. This fight is so important for many of us whose future hangs in the balance
This is baffling. Diversity shows us where our experiences overlap. It teaches us to recognize commonality before differences. It breeds empathy. It combats fear. It makes us better. It’s what our country is built on. The bigger concern is what would we become WITHOUT diversity. https://t.co/e78Yun4UUT
I am an American veteran. I fought so you could respect the flag anyway you see fit, standing, kneeling, even nothing. I don’t require any special respect from you beyond the common decency with which you treat all people. The only thing I want is to be treated like everyone else
On Bad Choices
-
I watched yet another TV story where a (glamorous, sympathetic) core cast
person refuses to take down a huge villain because it would hurt one person
they...
Still Performing After All These Years
-
The cast of 'Much Ado About Nothing' (2026)
Once an actor, always an actor. During my final curtain call at the end of
each production run, I always think...
Origin story
-
I suppose you’re all wondering why I brought you here. To be honest, the
base in that extinct volcano was the first choice, but it suffered some
recent, sh...
My C2E2 2020 Schedule
-
My first con of 2020 is coming up and I’m pleased to share I’ll be at C2E2
again from February 28-March 1. I’m on two panels this year and pretty Continue
...
My 2015 in Books
-
This was my first full calendar year as a teacher, so it isn't too
surprising that the number of books I read this year falls far below any
other. My goa...
Posts
