Chaos in the White House ?

RMV writes:

Chaos in the White House? The news seems to read that way,but don’t be fooled.Multiple agendas ? Key players at cross purposes? Absolutely,but nothing is happening by chance.Rather,each of the individual sorties deriving from the various power groups is carefully planned and meticulously aimed at controlling ever larger swaths of the people’s money or the people themselves.Let’s take one example,immigration.A shibboleth for ” Let’s make America white again”.As explained by Trump,the purpose of immigration reform is to rid us of “all those bad dudes,the murderers,rapists and drug dealers who swarmed across the border.Hey nobody can complain about least of all hard working immigrants who’d be the first victims of criminal elements in their midst.(Of course,the facts are that undocumented immigrants have lower crime rates than comparable native populations.)but the criminals are not who are targeted.The proposed and implemented immigration policy targets all undocumented ” illegals” reputedly some six million souls most of whom(a vast majority)are hard-working,tax-paying,church-going individuals In close-linked families…fathers,mothers,children.They form,for good or ill,the very foundation of our fruit growing,labor intensive agricultural and housing/construction industries not to mention the gardening and handyman needs of suburban America.Why on earth target them? Their loss would cut swaths of pain across America.And why the draconian methods? We learn that any one who can’t prove his/ her legal status on the spot will be snatched up off the streets,brought to detention centers and deported without court or any legal proceeding.The only crime need be the presumed illegal entry status.As long as some officer “thinks” that you might commit some future crime,he/she would be authorized to arrest,detain and deport and not necessarily back to where you came from.Not enough cops available- or willing to sell out neighbors and friends?No matter,we’re going to hire 15,000 additional ICE cops to do the job.Need ’em fast? The old Blackwater private army of Iraq fame( shame) re- formed and with a new name ,is ready.
Likely Result:Panic in American cities with many afraid to leave homes,to shop,or even to go to police if victimizedFamilies anticipate being torn apart,with any member potentially swept up in a police dragnet( as happened this past weekend) never to be seen again.We haven’t seen anything like this in America since the slave auctions of the ante-vellum South. Absurd? Inhuman? What could the justification be ?
Plenty! The Republican party faces a ‘death threat’.Extinction by demography.it is a fact :the U.S.will cease to be a white majority nation and shortly thereafter will have a majority of Hispanic Americans.You know,like Irish-Americans or African-Americans but this time with predominantly Mexican/South American/Puerto Rican/Cuban roots,add in the Democrats and SHAZAM not even the best state by state gerrymandering can save the Republicans.As for a GOP President? Likely never again?
Solution?The anti immigration/ deportation vendetta already underway.There are five million children born in the U.S.,full citizens living with undocumented parents targeted by ICE .ICE can’t touch the children but neither can the parents abandon them.Thus the parents take their children and dependent elders with them out of white America.This accounts for an additional 3.4 million English speaking Americanized potential voters.Trump lost to Clinton by some3 million popular votes plus some 8 million additional persons who voted against Trump but for someone not Hillary.Add in those 5 million citizen children growing up with families of their own by 2040 and maybe the Dreamers too and you’ve got demographic suicide for the GOP.And so,the end justifies the means!

16 Comments

  1. Yes, around the 1940’s Herbert Spencer was labeled by critics as a “Social Darwinist”. He didn’t consider himself as such. But another Spencer is today pointing out (again?) that survival always favors the “fittest”, and the term “fittest” can refer to the better of all existing and all future social structures. If a redistributive social program actually works most “fittingly” to strengthen human chances of survival a license to casually dismiss those who are weak, today often called social Darwinism, would not be the “fittest” policy. This clarifies the nature of questions that need to be addressed.
    The new technological challenges do not change these dynamics. What is new is that poor judgments can impact quickly and negatively on greater numbers than ever before.

  2. Thanks Susanna, Some have difficulty understanding that behind strict construction and original intent is the more fundamental issue of privatizing profit and socializing risk and debt in the interest of greed..You are not one of these.

    1. “Some have difficulty understanding that behind strict construction and original intent is the more fundamental issue of privatizing profit and socializing risk and debt in the interest of greed.”

      This statement by Daedal2207 (6 March 4:14) hits at a fundamental issue, one that explains perhaps most powerfully a major difference between today’s political left and right. Those on the right think of self- interest as being a fundamental force of nature, unavoidable, as prevalent in our lives as is gravity. The left is inclined to think of this force as totally (or too quickly becoming) something evil, it is seen as “greed”, something to be erased from society. The right understands that as the powers of gravity can be harnessed to the benefit of man, so too can those of self-interest. The key has to do with the nature of the “harness”. In a climate of honest competition profit is the incentive and loss is a disincentive. In a climate of free enterprise these intrinsic forces of nature operate rapidly to produce more of that which fulfills needs and diminishes the production of that which fails to meet needs. If this force-of-nature view of self-interest is accurate, a major function of government is to provide a “harness” to control the honesty of transactions. It also controls the extent to which any economic interest acquires monopolistic distortions (often identified accurately as greed) by protecting A COMPETITIVE BIDDING PROCESS for goods and services. But, because nature did not distribute ability equally, this process allows some to become much more successful (more rewarded) than others. This result clashes with a primary desire of the leftist mindset – that is, they want a greater equality in the distribution of outcome. “From each according to ability to each according to need” appears to be for the leftist an “a-priori good”. It is like a God-ordained law, written in stone and delivered from heaven.
      This leftist mindset (faith) requires their concept of government to have sufficient control that it can redistribute more equally the country’s product. Less important apparently is the fact that this process discourages the most able and thus with diminished production there will likely be less product available for redistribution. But like most religious beliefs this seems to allow the leftist believer to feel good about self. So we see yet another form of self-interest in action. To the degree that this self-interest starves those most needy of product couldn’t we call this fundamental feel-good dynamic of leftism an “excessive self-interest” – which is the very definition of “greed”?

      1. DS misses the obvious.Not all get to play the game where talent and intelligence can make a difference.There are probably midbrain differences( thalamus and amygdala) that account for degrees of empathic capacity.Ensuring homo sapiens survival evolutionarily requires both + and- types.The social ecology of a world with 7 billion inhabitants with thermonuclear destructive capability may make a mix that favors social Darwinism fatal for the species.

        1. Response to Daedal2207 (7 Mar 7:04 PM)
          It seems obvious that fate includes serendipity. Not all those with (or without) talent and intelligence will be equally lucky (or unlucky). What law or religion can undo the chance factor? With certitude being impossible, the only “game” that we can REALISTICALLY play is one composed of probabilities. It is true that by taking a leap of faith (as in leftism), we can pretend that we can correct for nature’s unfairness and create a level playing field where all can play and reap rewards equally (or more equally) – which feels good – until reality kicks in with a multitude of unintended, life-destroying consequences. But if evidence of this downside can be ignored, self-directed good feelings can be protected. Isn’t it “greed” when one allows the self to be served at the expense of others?
          As Daedal2207 has indicated, the capacity for “empathy” may vary for “midbrain” reasons. It also has several meanings, each stimulating different consequences depending on its focus. If it refers only to an emotional identification with those we identify as “suffering” our attention will be on improving their condition. This sentiment can move us to be of great aid in reducing the pain of THOSE PEOPLE WE CAN IDENTIFY. A problem arises when the methods selected to provide help have consequences that actually create more pain and suffering. For instance, a government can be directed to tax resources from person “A” and give them to suffering person “B”. We can feel good because the person we wanted to help has been helped. But what if person “A” had his own plans for the use of his resources that would have reduced the suffering of all persons “C” through “Z”? If the word “empathy” allows us to identify with those having the spirit of entrepreneurship we might have understood better the negative consequences of taxing person “A” and may have prevented our government from inflicting more suffering than it prevented.
          Person “B” was helped because we knew about his plight, and we might not be aware of the travail being experienced by persons “C” through “Z”. This may be the real dilemma facing us. Accuracy in math and statistics is needed in order to “see” the big picture – and that may be the greatest variable in our capacity for forms of empathy that matter most. Related: I noticed that Harvard Sociologist Charles Murray, one of the most published practitioners of math and social statistics today, was recently forced off a college campus stage by students who refused to “see” beyond their ever-so-more-important personal feelings of righteousness.

          Darwin’s “survival of the fittest” is likely an unavoidable dynamic. If all our options are of a social nature, placing the word “social” before Darwinism doesn’t enlighten us. But we can reasonably argue that the fittest social structures are those that will work best for human survival. We just haven’t figured out all the variables, both subject and context, that accurately describe “fittest”. These comments are an effort.

        2. I suspect that Darwin himself had a better sense of time than Spencer who is responsible for Social Darwinism.I.E.The millions of years that it takes to apparently ( but not really) stabilize an adaptation.we’ve evolved over a few hundred thousand years and the social changes supported by our technology are the product of a few hundred,maximally thousand, years.

  3. So many things to touch on, RMV … a pleasure, if one tends to approach the parallel roads of sociology, history, with politics providing bridges. Are we witnessing seismically dramatic shifts, or is our age making us more aware of the subtle shifting sands.

    RMV: “Let’s take one example,immigration. A shibboleth for ‘Let’s make America white again.'”

    RMV, your description with full understanding of the immigrant experience is most moving. Under the best of circumstances, it still carries embedded impressions, memories and longings.

    Human movement is healthy … it contributes to the strengthening of the gene pool … our survival. Nonetheless, the process is equivalent to the crucible. It’s probably a safe assumption to attribute this to Nature at work. Throughout the development of our nation, we have had policies that, while benefitting expansion, were implemented in cruel and sadistic fashion … never considering the suffering and cost to the human element. One of the conundrums to our description, however, has been our ability to see ourselves as preordained … 19th century manifest destiny, the Monroe doctrine … while under the longest practice of human enslavement (Reconstruction was hardly better) and genocide attempt of the Native American. In between we had ethnic exploitation of Asians (railroad construction labor pools), Irish, and Eastern Europeans. It’s not as if we did not intern our own citizens, right? In other words, the myth of the happily welcomed immigrant relies on so many uncontrollable conditions … not the least of which is timing. Exceptionalism in human rights?

    RMV: “Chaos in the White House? The news seems to read that way, but don’t be fooled. Multiple agendas?”

    The White House IS in chaos. It’s a self-promoted style of management by a self-absorbed, undisciplined and insecure man/child … pitting one against the other, i.e. conflict. As any parent knows, it’s an exhausting environment and not conducive to efficiency and satisfaction at the workplace. Agenda? If we believe in history and its lessons, the greedy and inhumane policies of the 1% … or,, more accurately, the 0.1% … will fail. Economics will show. You can lie … and, boy, does he and his cadre lie!! … but, math is exact in the cosmos. “Undocumented” people pay taxes, contribute overwhelmingly to our economy … as in the buy-and-discard, and buy-and-discard, etc. … and, as you pointed out, they reflect more, much more the values of family and community.

    You cannot eat diamonds and gold. It is quite unfortunate to (as mentioned above) witness the cruelty and injustice perpetrated in our name … another Trail of Tears. Hopefully, realizing the consequences, we (as an article referenced) the middle class will unite with labor and agriculture in the common cause of working for the whole.

    It’s an honor for me to participate in this blog … in the hope that younger people access it and are inspired/motivated to act … be proactive.

    Thank you, RMV.

  4. And let’s look at some other possibilities:
    Given such contrasting views as to what “America” should become it is reasonable that the two major political parties would be in conflict. Those who are devoutly invested in leftist causes have suffered a sharp reversal of fortune. For their agendas to succeed fully, they need “Justices” who are at ease reinterpreting law, those who view the Constitution as “a living document”. The Republican win, with a focus on selecting “original intent” Jurists, has among the left caused extreme levels of desperation. Any distortion that could possibly cast dispersion on the Trump Presidency is employed. There is a struggling hope that this obstacle to what they perceive to be their morally superior cause(s) can be removed from office. Because there are many “true believers” ensconced in the media and among important government departments, diverse forms of sabotage are likely being deployed against the Republicans. Some Republican intellectuals see this as an organized effort. They believe that a form of coup is currently being waged at the highest levels.
    For over two years now I have been exploring in this blog fundamental differences between our two major political parties. The Republicans are focused on equality under the law for individuals. As devised by our founders, “individual” justice should prevail regardless any person’s group affiliation. Also, under original intent we are to have a small, divided-power government that referees the play of a free market economy thereby minimizing the dangers associated with our government possibly becoming a monopolistic player unfairly competing in the game. The Democrats, with their focus on “social” justice, strive to create a strong central government powerful enough to leverage (force and coerce) a more equal distribution of product (as well as enforcement of “proper” sentiments). Equity is measured by comparing group performance, outcome, and attitudes. An excess of what the Republicans value tends toward anarchy. Too much of what the Democrats value tends toward totalitarianism.
    In spite of decades-long use of false accusations about the Republicans having fundamentally racist motives, there is nothing in the Republican goal (original intent) that makes race, or any other group affiliation, of special importance. (Just the opposite, from the Republican point of view it is those who attribute prime importance to tribal affiliations who have become the problem). For leftist beliefs which are deeply entrenched into ideas about “social” justice, race and other group interests are of the highest priority. (We see such beliefs vividly on display in these remarks by Daedal2207.) Apparently it is (almost?) impossible for some mindsets to understand that content of character (E Pluribus Unum) can transcend, even erase, racial identifications. It is probably projection that causes many Democrats to believe (and see) what is not there and is not true. (For instance, on the principle of prioritizing INDIVIDUAL justice, a person’s refusal to provide “special” treatment to anyone belonging to a leftist’s favored group is falsely deemed to be an act of hatred against (all) members of that group.)
    To the degree that people perceive that their personal place of meaning is synonymous with their particular tribe’s success and status, Daedal2207’s observations about demographic threats to Republican goals (original intent) would be accurate. To the degree that our citizens understand the benefits intrinsic in the Founders’ original values, racial or other tribe-like group identifications acquire importance only in the sense that such constructs tend to be destructive of the best that could be. No matter their race or group category, original intent thinkers will vote for the most meaningful form of justice – the kind assigned equally to each citizen.

    1. The escalating White House mess is not only indicating the Trumpeter’s instability but the increased danger to our democracy that his presidency has engendered as well.Keep looking for the pony Don,I don’t see goodies for anyone miraculously appearing under his tent.

      1. What I have presented is a foundation, the shape of which helps us understand better what can RATIONALLY be built upon it. If this foundation is accurate we can see reasons to distrust the projections of minds driven by agendas other than the truth of things. Biased minds create fake news. Minds that need to believe themselves to be morally superior (self-righteous) tend to bias more so than minds that are SEARCHING (using the good tools of science) for what works best. This foundation provides reasonable basis on which we might project ideas and judgments that have a greater probability of ACTUALLY working to humanity’s benefit.
        I did not get “into the weeds” as to the conflicting stories such as those regarding the chaos or unity of the Trump campaign. But, as suggested above, we can make probable judgments about the bias or lack of bias employed by those sources presenting the “news” about such isues.
        Questions truth-seekers must ask of self when reading the “news”:
        False or true? What are the possibilities? Why are some of the possibilities ignored? When some rational possibilities are ignored others are thus being exaggerated. Why? What are the likely motives? Are those writing the “news” aware of the other possibilities? If so, we can conclude that there is a conscious effort to deceive. If not, we can understand that the “news” is coming from a shallow range of (conscious) awareness. In general, if obvious possibilities are not considered this is a clear clue as to the existence of bias.

    2. The Republican win with an intent of selecting “original intent jurists” ….

      Were I to accept that premise, I would have to believe that our founding fathers wanted rule by the wealthy and powerful over rule by the common man. I would have to accept that our founding fathers wanted churches to rule by law, ignoring separation of church and state. I would have to accept that they wanted large businesses to be granted personhood while the rights of individuals would be diminished or outright denied.

      Were I to accept that our constitution is not “a living document”, then I would have to accept that slavery should be legal, women should not be allowed to work outside the home, or hold public office, or even vote, and that it’s acceptable for capitalists to put the very lives of our citizens at risk for capitalistic gain.

      For all of the alt-reich (spelling intentional) Christians who hide behind the cloak of religion, I seriously doubt that were Jesus to run for office as a Republican today, he would stand a chance in Hell, though the alt-reich claim he rules their Heaven. Go figure.

      Let’s look at his qualifications for office: he was a peaceful, radical, non-violent revolutionary, who hung around with hookers, criminals, and lepers. He was a man who was anti-capitalism, anti-wealth, and even anti-public-prayer. He never spoke English, nor was he an American citizen. Jesus was anti-death penalty, never spoke against abortion or for anti-gay policies, never justified torture, or called the poor lazy, never asked a leper for a copay, and never fought for tax cuts for the wealthy. He was a long-haired, brown skinned, homeless, Middle Eastern Jew … but that’s only if you actually believe what’s in the Bible.

      And this is what the GOP bases their “original intent” interpretation of our constitution on? Their claims of nationalism and rule by God are a bit far fetched.

      1. Good job, GregoryS!!! Wish I could have said it as well!!! But, you didn’t answer what Nature’s “original intent” was. No brain development? Tsk, tsk.

      2. There is so little in Gregory’s statement that relates to reality that it is of particular interest. We see here an example of why humanity’s path ahead is so difficult and dangerous. The Constitution’s “original intent” allowed an amendment process that abolished several states’ advocating of slavery (which had been an acceptable practice world-wide since the beginning of human history). It prohibited the establishment of a state religion. It said nothing about “women working at home”. On the contrary, it protected for individuals an equal liberty to discover for themselves their own paths to their own interpretation of happiness. It protects myriad forms of business activity such that maximum life-saving resources are most likely to be available thereby serving the greatest number when needed.
        I keep my arguments in the realm of what can be measured and compared. Religious concepts about who is good and evil too often devolves into attitudes of self-righteousness – and creates conflict with what “actually works best” in the real world. The addictive tenacity with which many hold onto the marvelous psychological rewards that can accrue when engaged in the process of “leaping beyond the evidence” (faith) may explain (most?) of the heated conflict our world is experiencing. Something to be considered and guarded against – such feel-good addictions can be caused by cultivating beliefs other than those associated with religion. Those so addicted apparently crave the company of others of similar need as well as copious quantities of “fake news”. If understood correctly, science (the antidote to such unhealthy addictions) keeps us constantly questioning – and learning – AND ADJUSTING.

    1. I am contributing below the latest report from the Washington Post … on the chance that anyone doubts that the White House is in chaos. Either, “where there’s smoke, there’s fire” or the immature reaction by a 70-year old man is more disturbing and worry-some than checks-and-balance institutions are willing to recognize.

      From: The Washington Post
      Date: March 5, 2017 at 9:22:51 PM EST
      Subject: Trending Now: Trump spent the weekend mad — steaming, raging mad. Insiders detail his fury over leaks, setbacks and accusations.

      The Washington Post
      Democracy Dies in Darkness

      Trending Now Sun., Mar. 05, 2017 9:21 p.m.

      Trump spent the weekend mad — steaming, raging mad. Insiders detail his fury over leaks, setbacks and accusations.
      Trump’s young presidency has existed in a perpetual state of chaos. The issue of Russia has distracted from what was meant to be his most triumphant moment: his address to a joint session of Congress. And now his latest unfounded accusation — that Barack Obama tapped Trump’s phones during last fall’s campaign — had been denied by the former president and doubted by both allies and fellow Republicans.

      At the center of the turmoil is an impatient president increasingly frustrated by his administration’s inability to erase the impression that his campaign was engaged with Russia, to stem leaks about both national security matters and internal discord and to implement any signature achievements.

      This account of the administration’s tumultuous recent days is based on interviews with 17 top White House officials, members of Congress and friends of the president.
      Read more »

      You are signed up for the following breaking news alerts: Technology | World | Health/Science/Environment | National | Politics | Economy/Business.
      You received this email because you signed up for breaking news alerts. Don’t want to receive Trending Now alerts? Click here. For additional free email alerts and newsletters, or to unsubscribe, click here.
      We respect your privacy. If you believe that this email has been sent to you in error, or you no longer wish to receive email from The Washington Post, click here. Contact us for help.
      ©2017 The Washington Post, 1301 K St NW, Washington DC 20071

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s