April 1, 2016
TWIN SPECTERS HAUNTING AMERICA’S POLITICIANS
“It wasn’t supposed to have been like
this, it wasn’t supposed to have been like this at all …” is the paraphrased theme
of one of Gordon Bok’s ballads about the Sea. It referred to the fact that the
fishing grounds had been depleted and that the fishermen now had to move on to
another more distant bay. The upcoming November presidential election also was
not supposed to have been like this. It was expected to be straight forward. The
Bush-Clinton dynasties were to have been re-anointed by their respective
parties and “business as usual” was to have reemerged. But as the proverb says:
“none are so blind as they who don’t want to see.”
Our Republicans, especially, have
misread the change in the mental attitude of the country that was heralded with
Obama’s 2008 election, which I called at the time a “tectonic shift” (November
6, 2008).” They regarded it as a temporary aberration
and vowed that he would not be allowed to succeed. The white middle and upper
class establishment expected to regain power with the next election. It was not
to be; Obama was re-elected. The Republican political leadership learned
nothing from these defeats and thought that one of their candidates would
easily win the nomination and then the presidency. But they lived in the 1980’s
with Saint Ronald as their role model. More than thirty years have passed since
Reagan’s inauguration and the country has fundamentally changed since that
time. In addition the Republicans now live by the Reagan myth rather than the
Reagan facts.
I owe the title of this essay to two
young revolutionary atheists who met in a Paris coffee-house. They soon became
friends, and with their combined intellects wrote pamphlets and books that
profoundly changed the world. Discerning readers will, of course, immediately
recognize that I am talking about Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels who published
on February 24, 1848 the Manifest der Kommunistischen Partei;
better known, in its English translation, as The Communist Manifesto. Its first sentence reads: “Ein Gespenst geht um in Europa – das Gespenst
des Kommunismus. A specter haunts Europe – the specter
of communism.”
The reason for bringing up this document
now is to demonstrate that when ideas are first pronounced they are ridiculed
as well as ignored but some of them refuse to die. They lie more or less
dormant until times change sufficiently for their enactment. This fundamental
fact also underlies the purpose of these essays: to put current events in their
historical context. Americans are no longer taught history and are, therefore,
incapable of learnings its lessons. This is why the country re-enacts European
imperialism and the unbridled “Manchester capitalism” that gave rise to
Europe’s revolutions of the 19th and 20th century.
The Manifesto was first published during
the Paris Revolution of February 1848, but with the defeat of that attempt by
students and manual workers to gain a voice in affairs of state it lingered in
obscurity until the next French Revolution of 1871 when in March of that year
the Paris Commune briefly established a communist regime. The Franco-Prussian War
ended the rule of Napoleon III’s Second Empire in 1870, and a provisional
Republican government was established. It resided at Versailles because the left
leaning Parisian populace was regarded as untrustworthy to accept the financial
burdens the country was forced to adopt in order to rid itself of German
occupation. As the March 1871 events showed, this precaution was justified and
the Paris spring rebellion was crushed by government forces within two months.
Nevertheless, since the causes of the revolt had only been partially remedied
the Communist Manifesto entered in the ensuing decades its glory days with
translations into the world’s major languages. After Marx’s death in 1883, Engels
brought the Manifesto as well as Das Kapital up to date and by 1894 these documents had
achieved their final form. They became Vladimir Ulyanov’s and Lev Davidovich Bronstein’s Holy Writ. These two comrades in
arms are, of course, better known by their nom de guerre as Lenin and Trotsky. Just
as in the case of Marx and Engels the junior partner was actually the more
effective one. Without Engels’ financial support of Marx’s writings as well as direct
stipends to Marx and his family, the books would never have seen the light of
day. A similar situation pertained to the other duo. The so-called October/November
(depending upon which calendar one uses) 1917 Revolution that established the
Soviet Union, and thereby provided the basis for the enactment of Marx/Engels’ political
ideas, was actually a Putsch against the Kerensky government carried out by
Trotsky with a handful of followers. They toppled the legitimate government within
one night while Lenin was still exiled in Finland. The popular revolution which
forced the Czar’s abdication had already occurred in February of that year.
Marxist-Leninist type communism went
against human nature and died a natural death with the collapse of the Soviet
Union. The Marx-Engels philosophy had, however, spawned a number of socialist
movements that were less radical. They permitted some degree of private
property and retained the family unit as the basis for a sound economy. In this
manner the socialists achieved political equality with the more conservative
elements of European society after WWI and especially after WWII. The specter
of communism has been laid to rest in contemporary European society.
The twin specters that haunt American
politicians at this time go by the names of “The Donald” for Republicans, and
“Bernie” for Democrats. The ascendancy of either one was quite unexpected and
the respective party leaderships are at a loss with how to deal with these
phenomena. Bernie Sanders, a senator from Vermont who competes with Hillary Clinton
for the nomination, is an anomaly in American politics. Although running on the
Democrat ticket he calls himself unabashedly “a socialist” on the European model.
He does so knowing fully well that the U.S. by and large still lives in a
mental framework that equates socialism with communism and that his chances of
winning the presidency are next to nil. Nevertheless the huge turnout of young
voters “for Bernie” in this primary season is an unexpected portent that sends
shivers down the backs of the more conservative elements in the party even when
they call themselves “progressive.” I shall discuss the Bernie phenomenon in a
subsequent issue and now discuss only his “Republican” counterpart Donald
Trump.
I have placed “Republican” in quotes
because just like Bernie he only uses the party label as a means for election,
since Independents, to whom he really belongs, have at this time no chance of
winning. Not only is Trump truly independent of the party hierarchy but he also
claims, as a billionaire, to be self-funding his candidacy. When he announced
his candidacy the powers in the Republican Party laughed and were certain that
this act of lunacy on his part was just a blip on the electoral radar screen that
would vanish as soon as the first votes were cast. They were forced to have
second thoughts when he systematically demolished his opponents in the debates
on a one by one basis. On August 6 of last year there were ten presidential
hopefuls that shared the stage at the debate. Now there are only three
remaining with Trump enjoying a considerable advantage over his rivals in the
delegate count.
I must admit that I did not watch all of
the Republican debates up to now. There were too many, and the rhetoric soon
became redundant. Those that I did see were, however, sufficient to form an
initial view of how he acts and what he stands for. Trump clearly dominated the
scene while being aided and abetted by the questioning media personalities. He
got the lions’ share of questions to which he responded with gusto. His method
of dealing with the co-contenders for the crown of nomination in the debates or
on social media was simple and ruthless. He belittled them. Marco Rubio was “little
Marco”, Ted Cruz “a pussy”, Jeb Bush “a stiff you wouldn’t hire in private
enterprise”, Governor Kasich a “weak baby,” and Dr. Carson was faulted for his
“pathological temper.” It is true, however, that some
of his opponents likewise descended into the gutter and the debates, apart from
the last one, became a circus rather than reasoned discourse. Governor Kasich
remained on the sidelines while the others hurled insults at each other.
The demeaning of his opponents reminded
me of Hitler’s characterization of Western politicians. They were “worms,” as
he had found out during the 1938 Munich Conference. The campaign slogan “Make
America great again” had its counterpart in Germany’s restoration to greatness
and instead of Sieg Heil we are
treated to fervent shouts of “USA, USA” by Trump’s supporters who also have
started to imitate the SA by punching protesters at their meetings. The
language Trump uses is likewise vulgar and designed to appeal to the passions
of the underprivileged. He speaks off the cuff and fact checking is not one of
his virtues. Trump has already been compared to Mussolini but the Hitler comparison
is not yet en vogue because the latter is in American
circles nearly exclusively identified with the atrocities of WWII. But there
was a Hitler before 1938/1939 when the world woke up to the problem he
presented. It behooves us to pay just as much attention to the factors that
brought him to power as his conduct thereafter. For me there is simply no
denying the déjà vu of my adolescent years I experience when I watch the rise
of this new Messiah.
Hitler’s antisemitism finds its
counterpart in Trump’s treatment of Muslims. No distinction is made between
Muslim terrorists and ordinary people who either want to visit or live in
America in order to better their lives. All of them need to be prevented from
entry into this country. Other parallels with the Fuehrer’s conduct are the
boasting about his achievements and the use of massive exaggerations to make a
point. According to Trump, on 9/11 thousands of Muslims cheered in New Jersey
when the Towers came down. Our media were quick to expose this falsehood but
they failed to mention the source of this rumor. There was indeed some joy expressed
on the Jersey shore at that moment, but it was not by Muslims. A New Jersey
housewife who had a good look at the Towers from the rear window of her
apartment had watched the disaster but noted something else that struck her as
quite unusual. There was a white van in the parking lot with three people on
top who were filming the event. They were not shocked by it but appeared happy
and congratulated each other. This incongruous behavior prompted the lady to
write down the license plate and notify the authorities. It was then determined
that the van belonged to an Israeli moving company and the young men were
Israeli citizens connected to some extent with the Mossad. After lengthy
interrogations, which included lie detector tests, they were returned to
Israel. This event has never been properly reported by our official media but
there is considerable information on the Internet. An article based on recently
declassified FBI documents can be found at http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/09/11/911-revisited-declassified-fbi-files-reveal-new-details-about-the-five-israelis.
There exists, however, also footage by
MSNBC showing some Palestinians in the West Bank, especially children and young
men, celebrating what was purported to be the destruction of the WTC. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMOZvbYJMvU.
It would seem that Trump
had conflated and exaggerated these stories during his speech in Birmingham
Alabama last November when he said that “thousands and thousands of people
[Muslims] were cheering as that building was coming down.” The speech, which
can be viewed on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4p14xqPjKNA,
is a typical example of Trump’s oratory in regard to style and content. The day after the speech George Stephanopoulos
interviewed Trump and after showing the video clip dealing with the cheering
Muslims he took issue with the statement. This interview is important because
it shows Trump’s modus operandi. Here are the relevant segments from http://mediamatters.org/video/2015/11/22/abcs-george-stephanopoulos-fact-checks-donald-t/207020STEPHANOPOULOS:
“STEPHANOPOULOS:
You know, the police say that didn't happen and all
those rumors have been on the Internet for some time.
So
did you meek -- misspeak yesterday?
TRUMP:
It did happen. I saw it.
STEPHANOPOULOS:
You saw that...
TRUMP:
It was on television. I saw it.
STEPHANOPOULOS:
-- with your own eyes.
TRUMP:
George, it did happen.
STEPHANOPOULOS:
Police say it didn't happen.
TRUMP:
There were people that were cheering on the other side of New Jersey, where you
have large Arab populations. They were cheering as the World Trade Center came
down. I know it might be not politically correct for you to talk about it, but
there were people cheering as that building came down -- as those buildings
came down. And that tells you something. It was well covered at the time,
George.
Now,
I know they don't like to talk about it, but it was well covered at the time.
There
were people over in New Jersey that were watching it,
a heavy Arab population, that were cheering as the buildings came down. Not
good.
STEPHANOPOULOS:
As I said, the police have said it didn't happen. …”
Well, anybody can make a mistake but when it is pointed out one should
correct rather than embellish it further. It should, however, also be mentioned
that the official media were, and still are, remarkably silent over the affair
of the Israeli “art students” in relation to 9/11 (9/11 Remembered. October 1,
2011).
On March 21
Trump used the invitation by AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) to assure this powerful lobbying group of his devotion not
only to the state of Israel but also its Prime Minister Netanyahu. He was, of
course, not the only one, all the current candidates for the presidency
regardless of political party had been invited and all with one exception had
accepted. Bernie Sanders, as a Jew, did not feel the need to spout phrases he
did not believe in and instead of going to Alabama for the Conference went to
Utah. The effort was appreciated; he received a rousing welcome and
subsequently 80 per cent of the primary votes while Hillary had to make do with
the rest.
To get the
full flavor of what a Trump presidency would look like in his eyes I suggest
that the reader not only views the essentially off the cuff speech in
Birmingham, Alabama which contained the Muslim statement, but also the scripted
one, read from the teleprompter, before AIPAC that has been referred to as: “The Most Presidential Speech
By Donald Trump Ever. http://time.com/4267058/donald-trump-aipac-speech-transcript.
Some
key statements were:
My
number-one priority is to dismantle the disastrous deal with Iran. I have been
in business a long time. I know deal-making. And let me tell you, this deal is
catastrophic for America, for Israel and for the whole of the Middle East. I
will adopt a strategy that focuses on three things when it comes to Iran.
First, we will stand up to Iran’s aggressive push to destabilize and dominate
the region.
Secondly, we will
totally dismantle Iran’s global terror network which is big and powerful, but
not powerful like us.
Third, at the very
least, we must enforce the terms of the previous deal to hold Iran totally
accountable. And we will enforce it like you’ve never seen a contract enforced
before, folks, believe me.
Which brings me to my
next point, the utter weakness and incompetence of the United Nations … An agreement
imposed by the United Nations [on the Palestinian issue] would be a total and
complete disaster. The United States must oppose this resolution and use the
power of our veto, which I will use as president 100 percent.
We’ll get it solved. One way or the
other, we will get it solved. We will move the
American embassy to the eternal capital of the Jewish people, Jerusalem….The
Palestinians must come to the table knowing that the bond between the United
States and Israel is absolutely, totally unbreakable. And they must come to the
table willing to accept that Israel is a Jewish state and it will forever exist
as a Jewish state. I love the people in this room. I love Israel. I love
Israel.
It is obvious that
the speech consisted of declaratory promises without any indication how these
objectives could be accomplished. He emphasized his negotiating skills, but he
does not want to negotiate in the usual sense of the word; he wants to dictate.
Negotiations consist of give and take and the outcome should be mutually
agreeable. But that is not what Trump has in mind. What would he offer the
Palestinians, for example, when Israel holds all the cards and is unwilling to
give up any? The phrase “one way or the other” we will get it solved also comes
right out of Hitler’s vocabulary who kept telling us that his solution to the
political problems of the day would be so
oder so. In other words, if the negotiating
partner does not agree to his terms military force will be used.
There was a sequel to
Trump’s performance. AIPAC’s President Lillian Pinkus
apologized for his demeaning comments about President Obama because the theme
of the Conference was unity instead of division. Several attendees were shocked
at the applause Trump received and Haaretz’s reporter
(Israel’s left wing paper) walked out in disgust. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/03/22/aipacs-apology-for-trump-speech-is-unprecedented.
Trump’s oratory may have helped him in Likud circles, but American Jews are by
and large liberal with little regard for the extreme right that currently holds
power in Israel.
One may now argue
that these are campaign speeches and one needs to look at his official program
as laid out on his website. When one goes to https://www.donaldjtrump.com one finds
under Positions: Healthcare Reform, U.S.-China Trade Reform, Veterans
Administration Reform, Tax Reform, Second Amendment Rights and Immigration
Reform.
As far as Healthcare is concerned “Obabamacare” would be repealed. Its place would mainly be
taken by health savings accounts and all health insurance premiums would be
fully tax-deductible. The “free market” would
supply insurance coverage opportunities and “basic options for Medicaid” would
be reviewed in order to ensure that “no one slips through the cracks simply
because they cannot afford insurance.” In addition existing laws that
inhibit the sale of health insurance across state lines would be modified and price transparency from all health care providers
would be required.
While this sounds
reasonable it omits the mindset of insurance companies which requires profits.
It is highly likely that with the repeal of Obamacare insurance premiums would
rise and in the interval before any new system can be put in place hundreds of
thousands if not millions would lose their current benefits. All of us should
remember that while Congress was still debating Obama’s proposals insurance
rates already went up and they were not reduced thereafter.
In regard to trade
with China the website offered four goals: 1. Bring
China to the bargaining table by immediately declaring it a currency
manipulator. 2. Forcing China to uphold intellectual property laws and stop
their unfair and unlawful practice of forcing U.S. companies to share
proprietary technology with Chinese competitors as a condition of entry to
China’s market. 3. Reclaim millions of
American jobs and reviving American manufacturing by
putting an
end to China’s illegal export subsidies and lax labor and environmental
standards. 4. Strengthen our
negotiating position by lowering our corporate tax
rate to keep American companies and jobs here at home, attacking our
debt and deficit so China cannot use financial blackmail against us,
and bolstering the U.S. military presence in the East and South China
Seas to discourage Chinese adventurism.
These statements are either naïve or
cynical. He should have read Epictetus’ chapter on: What is or is not in our
power? Only point 4 can be regarded as being within the power of an American
president. In regard to the other three how will Mr. Trump react if he were to
receive the Chinese equivalent of the Soviet Union’s famous: Nyet!
The Veterans administration reform
plan would ensure that all the health needs of veterans will be met in a timely
and appropriate manner. Corrupt and incompetent VA executives would be fired.
This is likewise easier said than done and the costs would yet have to be
determined.
In regard to tax reform individuals
whose income is less than $25,000, or married couples whose income is less than
$50,000, would pay no taxes. The current seven tax brackets would be reduced to
four: 0%, 10%, 20% and 25%. Business taxes, regardless of size would maximally
be 15% and inheritance taxes would be abolished. The site explains why this
reform would be “revenue neutral,” but I have to leave this aspect to CPAs
although the statements that most deductions and loopholes of the very rich
will be eliminated, is open to considerable doubt. As long as there is a tax
code and there are lawyers, the very rich will always find ways and means to
evade taxes. The only way to ensure that
this would be impossible would be the introduction of a flat tax that does not
allow any deduction whatsoever.
The Second Amendment rights (i.e.
carrying arms by individuals) would not be infringed and existing laws on the
purchase of firearms strictly enforced. Violent criminals would have to be more
seriously prosecuted and the mental health system “fixed.” “We need real
solutions to address real problems.” That is true, but again: what would the
“fixed” mental health system look like?
Finally: Immigration Reform. All of us
already know about the wall on our southern border Trump promised to build and
that would be paid for by Mexico. In addition the number of ICE (Immigration
and Customs Enforcement) officers would be tripled, all criminal aliens
deported, sanctuary cities defunded, penalties for overstaying a visa enhanced,
and birthright citizenship would be ended. The ban on Muslims entering the
country was not mentioned.
In summary one can say that Mr. Trump
hardly meets the qualifications one would hope an American president,
especially in these perilous times, to possess. He comes across as an angry,
narcissistic, boisterous person who believes that he can force his will upon
the rest of the world. His fund of general knowledge seems to be meager and a
statement that his book The Art of the
Deal is his “second favorite of all time,” should give one pause. He
allotted the number one spot to the Bible. But although he publicly stated that
he was a “strong Christian,” his conduct casts considerable doubt also on that
assertion.
When pressed for details or caught on a
fundamental reversal of previously held positions he resorted to “unpredictability”
as a virtue. While this may be appropriate for some circumstances in warfare,
the American public needs to know where its future president really stands on
vital issues and how he plans to enact his goals. Mr. Trump is not likely to
meet this standard and should not be elected.
The Republican establishment knows this
and is trying its best to exorcise this specter either during the remaining
primary season or at the Convention in July. But they are confronted with
another difficult problem. The heir they apparently want to anoint, Senator Ted
Cruz, is also a deeply flawed individual who is disliked even by his senatorial
colleagues. How a person like this can not only unite the party but win the
general election in November is what is proverbially called “a good question.”
The only Republican candidate who might be able to achieve this feat would be
Governor Kasich but he consistently fails to get traction in the polls.
When one considers all of these various
aspects in the context of the difficult state our country is in at present, one
begins to think that we really are at the end of an era. Similar to what
happened in Europe in the past two centuries this is likely to terminate either
in a popular revolt or a general war. Let us hope that history will not repeat itself
and that evolution towards a more sane and just society rather than revolution
will take place.
|