Trump, Lincoln and Rosa Parks

For all his flaws, Donald Trump has been handed the opportunity to go down in history on the same page as Abraham Lincoln and Lyndon B. Johnson.

The two are, of course, very different Presidents, separated not only by political party, but 100 years of history. In 1862, Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation. And 103 years later, Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

To the extent history lurches toward justice in big, widely spaced steps, those were probably the two biggest lurches in racial justice in American experience.

But to all appearances, America is poised to make another big lurch forward. The details are still being worked out, but polls show that 84 percent of Americans support the protests, at least to some degree–a level of agreement rarely seen about anything.

And yet, even today, Trump was defending choke holds as often being “innocent and perfect” and suggesting he was a better racial-justice president than Abraham Lincoln, apparently based on the economic surge that blessed his first few years.

Continue reading Trump, Lincoln and Rosa Parks

Are we finally reaching a moment of truth on race?

As an older white guy, I’ve been unsure what to write about the present situation in America. Much of the online and news space does, and should, belong to people of color and Millennials. They are, and should be, the future. In fact, I am increasingly impressed by how today parallels events from 55 years ago.

Continue reading Are we finally reaching a moment of truth on race?

Why a Mask IS a Political Statement…Just Not a Partisan One

Unless you’ve had the news turned off for the past week, you know that the Mask Wars are on, with a lot of people suggesting that wearing a mask marks you as a Democrat while not wearing one marks you as Republican.

And superficially, there’s something to that. We have a President who declines to wear a mask in public and who not only taunts Joe Biden for wearing one, but at a recent press conference shamed a reporter for being “politically correct” when the reporter refused to take off his mask at the President’s request.

Continue reading Why a Mask IS a Political Statement…Just Not a Partisan One

Covid-19 & the Emperor’s New Clothes

We all know the story of the emperor’s new clothes. In it, the emperor is hoodwinked by rogues who take his money and make him…nothing. “Nothing” that his advisors, fearful of offending him, declare to be the finest finery in the land.

Then, the emperor dons the non-existent robes…and a little child calls him out, exclaiming, “But the Emperor has nothing on at all!”

Except…The original fable, by Hans Christian Andersen, is a little more complex.

Continue reading Covid-19 & the Emperor’s New Clothes

How to Make COVID-19 Evolve to Become Less Dangerous

Donald Trump says that even without a vaccine, COVID-19 will eventually fade away. And amazingly, the science says he might be right…though not if we follow his plan for reopening the country.

The science in question is evolutionary virology.

It says is that under certain circumstances viruses will evolve into less virulent forms. In fact, this might even be what happened to the 1918 Spanish Flu…though not until after it killed tens of millions of people.

Let me explain.

In order to be an evolutionarily successful, virus can’t just infect one person, they have to jump from one person to another. They can do that by making us cough, giving us diarrhea that contaminates other people’s food or water, or giving us sores that shed virus particles onto anyone or anyone we touch.

I.e., they make us sick.

But if they make us too ill, too quickly, they don’t get much chance to spread because we either collapse into bed, away from other people, or make others leery enough of catching the disease that they take suitable precautions.

Continue reading How to Make COVID-19 Evolve to Become Less Dangerous

Trump v. Female Reporters (and why he won’t wear a mask)

* Trump loves a strong visual. Image from The White House. Public Domain.

President Trump, as is his wont, preempted the news cycle today by abruptly ending a press conference after a testy exchange with CBS reporter Weijia Jiang and CNN’s Kaitlan Collins. But most of the press is over-simply describing what happened.

If you didn’t see it, it began when Jiang, who was born in China but has lived in the U.S. since age 2, asked why Trump insists on seeing COVID-19 testing as an international competition.

Trump sidestepped the question, then fired back, “Maybe that’s a question you should ask China.”

He then turned to Collins for the next question. But Jiang, wasn’t done, and Collins let her ask a very pointed follow-up: “Sir, why are you saying that to me, specifically, to ask China?”

It was a very good query, but Trump dismissed it as a “nasty question. ” He then he tried to skip over Collins to take a question from a different reporter.

But Collins wasn’t having it, and tried to ask her question anyway.

“No, that’s OK,” Trump said. (If you’ve not noticed, the “OK” part is one of his ways of dismissing people.)

“But you called on me,” she protested.

At which point Trump abruptly ended the press conference and walked out.

The reporting on this tends to say that he stormed out. But from the video, it appears that he was very much in control.

He wasn’t storming out. He was punishing the press crew for tolerating two uppity women. The message was very clear: if the press pool continues to let such women challenge him, he will punish them all, like a grade school teacher punishing the entire class when one person acts up. (I don’t know if they still do that, but that was a staple of my childhood.)

My guess is that his base saw it that way, too: as Trump, the alpha male leader firmly taking control…over women who don’t know their place.

Which brings me to my second point. Why doesn’t he wear a mask?

Because, now that everyone else visiting the White House, including the press corps, is required to wear masks, Trump as the only unmasked person looks bold, decisive, and very much in charge.

This was extremely evident in the video of him putting down Jiang and Collins. Their masks made them them look timid, weak, and partially faceless. Trump, unmasked, was the only complete human image in the video, and as such, again, very much the alpha male.

Please don’t read this as saying I approve. I don’t. Rather than being an actual leader and leading by example, he’s trying to project an image of leadership–and not a kind of leadership I approve of, anyway.

But the image of Trump unmasked and full-faced makes its point extremely dramatically, and whatever else you say about Trump, the man knows TV showmanship.

It is a clearly deliberate visual designed to reassure his base, while subliminally making a strong point to the few remaining independents.

The False Controversy of Vote by Mail

*Image credit: Chris Phan of himself using a vote-by-mail dropbox (a stamp-free alternative to USPS), via Wikipedia Commons,.

Yesterday, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed an executive order converting California’s November election entirely to vote-by-mail.

It’s a politically controversial decision, almost guaranteed to be contested in the courts.

It has also been described by CNN, Vox, and probably others as making California the first state to automatically send mail-in ballots to all registered voters.

Apparently, these news outlets never heard of Oregon. We’ve been conducting all of our elections this way for 20 years. In fact, one of my next projects is working my way through our spring ballot, which is crammed not only with primary campaigns, but important local issues.

The only thing that’s different about California’s vote-by-mail program is that Newsom did it by executive order. We did it by a voter-approved initiative all the way back in 1998.

Continue reading The False Controversy of Vote by Mail

The Corruption of Critical Thinking

This post is not directly about politics or COVID-19. But it should be, which is why I’ve tagged it for both.

When I was teaching at California State University, Sacramento in the late 1980s, the Cal State system was trying to increase the focus on classes that emphasized critical thinking.

If there was an official definition, I never saw it, but my department made it clear that the environmental studies law-and-public-policy classes I taught were exactly what they wanted.

I ran these classes not as lectures, but as discussions based on assigned readings, and my biggest goal was to challenge the students to think about the readings’ implications, rather than just taking them at face value.

One of my favorite moments was a discussion in which one of the students flipped whatever I was saying at the time back on itself and pointed out something I’d overlooked. “That’s what you taught us to do,” he said, when he realized how well he’d hoisted me by my own petard.

I don’t remember what grade he got for the course, but for that day, he definitely got an A+.

Since then, however, I’ve found that critical thinking is all too often replaced by shorthand substitutes.

Continue reading The Corruption of Critical Thinking

Scylla, Charybdis & COVID-19

In Greek mythology, Scylla and Charybdis were monsters guarding opposite sides of the narrow strait between Italy and Sicily. Chart a course too close to one side, and Scylla grabs you. Try to steer clear of Scylla and you fall prey to Charybdis.

It’s hard to think of a better metaphor for the modern moment.

Except…in the Greek lore, the two monsters acted independently. Now, it’s more like each isn’t so much trying to snare you for itself as to drive you into the other’s clutches. And it’s something we seem to be doing our level best to assist.

Let me elaborate.

Continue reading Scylla, Charybdis & COVID-19

Sweden v Georgia: Gambling on COVID-19

Sweden v. Georgia: it sounds like a sporting match—(can I have Sweden by 5½ points?)—but it’s actually a high-stakes alternative approach to the battle against COVID-19. (Photo © Ralf Roletschek, Wikimedia Commons.)

It began in Sweden, which—unlike other countries—has had no lockdown, no mandatory restrictions.  Instead, using a “trust-based” approach, it merely offered general guidance: work from home when possible, wash your hands, avoid unnecessary travel, and be particularly careful if you are older or suffer preexisting conditions. What it did not to was to shut down business, ban public gatherings, etc.

The impetus appears to have been a conclusion that the virus was bound to spread no matter how strict the control measures, so there was no point in being too draconian, so long as the curve was sufficiently “flattened” that health system wasn’t overwhelmed.

But Swedes are also a community-minded people, the plan’s architect Anders Tegnel told Nature:

As a society, we are more into nudging: continuously reminding people to use measures, improving measures where we see day by day that they need to be adjusted.

That decision has been, to put it mildly, controversial. As of April 25, Sweden had seen 18,177 cases, with 2,192 deaths—a much higher death rate than neighboring Norway, Denmark, Finland and Germany.

But, it has nevertheless flattened the curve and, Tegnel told Business Insider on April 24, enough people in Stockholm have already had the virus for the city (and soon the country as a whole) to develop enough herd immunity to ward off a massive rebound of infections in the fall.

Continue reading Sweden v Georgia: Gambling on COVID-19