Critical Thinking Theory

If social media has taught us anything it is that almost all of us have given up on the idea of thinking for ourselves.  We’ve transferred our obligation of thinking to someone, or something, else.  We pick the point of view we like and let others tell us what that point of view really means.  Take, for example, a dislike of Donald Trump.

We don’t like DJT, so we can’t like the things he does as President.  We can’t be bothered to actually understand what his administration has done, we look for memes that condemn him, whether they are true or not.  We side with those who oppose him, whether or not they offer a better solution, or are actually honest about their own motives.  It is the modern play on the ancient proverb “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” On the other side his supporters ask “Do I not hate those who hate You, O Lord, and detest those who rise against You?” (Psalms 139:22).

Nowhere is the elimination of critical thought more obvious than in the media.  A career where the idea of questioning would seem to be central to success, but has clearly been replaced by dogmatic commitment to a set of political beliefs. 

At one time our country had progressives, moderates, conservatives, liberals (historical definition), liberaltarians, authoritarians, and humanitarians.  Both parties had them.  I’m not sure how well they actually worked together, but the tension between them seemed to find balance that served the common good.  Thanks to the media’s (and perhaps higher education’s) shift to one side we have sacrificed that balance.  We are now not much better than a teeter-totter where we go up and down based on the struggles of the two parties for political domination.

We citizens have joined in on that ride picking sides where the idea of actually thinking critically about what is best for the nation isn’t really part of the dialogue anymore. But let’s be honest, 99% of us have never wanted to make those nation-shaping decisions.  That is what our representatives are for.  But I wonder?

I wonder how much our growth in population and the physical limits of our government buildings has shifted the balance of power?  For example, based on the 1790 census there was one Representative for every 34,436 citizens (on average).  Today that ratio is about 1:709,760.  The question is when one person is representing that many; do they actually give a true voice to the various minorities of their constituents? 

Oh well, as long as we don’t have to think too hard, I guess it’s okay.  We have an election, and as in every election both sides are saying it’s the most important election of our lifetime.  Didn’t they say that in 2016, 2012, 2008…?  At least we have memes that can show the world what is wrong with those other guys.

Humanity

This polarization of society seems to be destroying our humanity.  I had an interesting question presented to me this morning as I was relaxing after a game of pickleball.  A lady I had just met asked me a question.  She said a young man who was employed to care for the grounds in our community had rung her front door and asked to use the bathroom.  She said he had a look of panic in his eyes.  She asked what I would have done.  It seemed like such a simple question.

She went on to explain her mate, who was a doctor had been completely upset when she allowed him in.  He didn’t have a mask on, didn’t remove his muddy shoes and spent a long time in the bathroom.  Her companion explained they didn’t let their friends in for fear of COVID, how could she let in a complete stranger.

I’ve lived in this community now for two years and the comings and goings of the lawn care workers second nature.  They are in a word ubiquitous.  I don’t think any of them would come to my door unless they saw no other option to take care of a personal necessity.  So, for me the answer was simple.  I’d let them in to take care of their themselves.  Yet there are those who see these workers as servants and perhaps a class below us, or as unskilled laborers who should be treated with less respect because they are only grass cutters.

There are community pools in our community that have bathrooms, and I routinely see residents’ question why these workers may occasionally use them, since the rooms are clearly marked for resident use only. I’ve never bothered to respond to these questions, but it strikes me that people are willing to get on board with causes, but they don’t want to actually have to deal with the needs of individual people.

It is Russians, All the Way Down.

I grew up in the ‘50s and ‘60s, when the fear of nuclear war with the Soviet Union was the threat the government confronted, and in hindsight used to bind us together so we would ignore the racism and other domestic problems the nation faced.  In addition to the fire drills we had, we would also have nuclear attack drills where we would all hide in the halls or under our desks as the hordes of Soviet Bombers flew over our little town on their way to New York City.

Of course, we had the “Red” scare where Senator Joseph McCarthy dug up all the communists in government and Hollywood.  There were “Black” lists where people linked to the communist movement popular in the 1930s suddenly found they were no longer employable and if they were lucky enough could still find work writing under a pseudonym, but for hundreds of artists their fascination with communism led to their ruin.

In the 1980s we finally had a President who had enough of the Soviet Union and embarked on a plan, over the deep objections of his opponents to break the Soviet Union.  By the end of the decade the Soviet Union was no more.  It had been broken up into its individual states. Since then those border countries like Poland have seen their fortunes rise as they left the Warsaw pact to align with the developed countries of Western Europe.

The military of the Soviet Union was always portrayed as exceptional and would destroy the west in any conflict by their shear mass.  Fortunately, for all of us we never had to learn the truth or fallacy of this assumption, but it played well with the military-industrial complex who has sold increasingly expensive weapons to counter the mass and tech China brings as that threat the military-industrial complex must shift to, but that is the way of the world.  Those who design, build and sell weapons must always have an really dangerous adversary to defeat.

Back in 2009, then Secretary of State, Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton drug out an Office Depot “Easy Button” to tell her counter-part we were resetting the Russian-US relationship. 

And who can forget the 2012 whispered conversation between Barrack Obama and Russia’s President Dimitry Medvedev that after the election “He would have more flexibility.” 

 Well let’s fast forward to 2016 where the same two thought it would be a great idea to blame the Russians for interfering with the election to get Donald Trump elected.  Ever since then all the Democrats can see are Russians.  Every time one investigation fails they roll out Adam Schiff with another accusation.

As they scramble to bolster what I would describe as a weak ticket they have to do something to get us to ignore the man behind the curtain.  So, to paraphrase a cosmology metaphor[1] “It’s Russians all the way down.”

---

[1] https://cosmology.carnegiescience.edu/timeline/1610/turtles-all-the-way-down

The FBI

 

Background: The Federal Bureau of Investigations began its existence with an order from the United States Attorney General Charles Bonaparte to establish an organization within the DOJ to investigate matters that its already established agents couldn’t deal with.  These “special agents” would report directly to the Department's “Chief Examiner” who would, in turn, report to the AG.[1]  From this beginning in 1906 would grow the Bureau of Investigation, which would become the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

J. Edger Hoover became the first Director of the Bureau of Investigation in 1924, following the Teapot Dome Scandal.  One of his first acts was to fire the women agents in the agency as he “cleaned house” of all those who could be associated in any way with the bribery.  He then spent the rest of his career attempting to put the agency in the best light while he picked the cases they would investigate and feed to the press the highlights of their successes.  Many of those cases became fodder for Hollywood movies or television shows, always with the complete cooperation of the agency.  He remained the director until his death in 1972.  Along the way the FBI took on the mantel of the supreme law enforcement agency in America, although it was revealed shortly before his death that he had gone after “subversives and deviants” using tactics such as infiltration, burglaries, illegal wiretaps, planted evidence and false rumors leaked on suspected groups and individuals.  He called Dr. Martin Luther King the “most dangerous negro in the future of this nation.”[2]  It is said J. Edger Hoover remained director for so long because he was so highly respected.  It is also said he remained director for so long because his political opponents feared the information, he had in his folders on each of them.

Today: With this as the historical background of the FBI should we be shocked to see the abuse of the agency as it strove to prevent the election of an outsider, or falsified evidence to further its investigations of people the leadership in Washington felt should not be allowed to govern?  There is very little evidence in the history of the FBI to indicate it is a non-partisan organization.  The real question - does its partisan allegiance shift from party to party as administrations change or does it, like J. Edger, keep files on everyone to use to protect what the agency believes is its self-interest?

From my lowly position it would seem those in authority of the FBI believe it is their job to protect those individuals who may be useful to them in future administrations, and the concept of political neutrality be damned.

 

---

[1] https://www.fbi.gov/history/brief-history

[2] https://www.biography.com/law-figure/j-edgar-hoover

Who Do We Turn To?

Within my lifetime, and before, the American people turned to their Presidents to calm the nation and inspire confidence in the face of national disasters and crisis.  We learned about these great men and the confidence they instilled to the nation either in our history books, or if we were lucky enough in real time as they sought to calm the fears of a people looking for leadership.

Theodore Roosevelt, our 28^th President, is perhaps best known for thinking big as he guided the Nation.  With the passage of the Antiquities Act he began designating areas of national importance and in the course of this is credited for creation of the National Park system.  His speech on the role of a Citizen in a Republic[1] remains today a testament to the value of the individual.  He was also the President who began our entrance onto the global stage with the creation of the Panama Canal, and the sailing of the “Great White Fleet.”

When the Spanish Flu of 1918 hit the world, President Wilson and the government actively down played its dangers to avoid panic.  Of course, they were supported in this effort by the “Committee of Information” he had formed when the U.S. had entered the War to End All Wars.  As the committee noted “Truth and falsehood are arbitrary terms. The force of an idea lies in its inspirational value. It matters very little if it is true or false.” His government continued this charade even when 195,000 Americans died in October 1918.  The Philadelphia Inquirer noted “Worry is useless. Talk of cheerful things instead of disease.”[2]

When the Stock Market saw its historic collapse in 1929 and the nation turned to Franklin Delano Roosevelt to save us from the economic disaster before us, we listened to his inaugural address where he said, “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.”  He then began a rather expansive socialization of our nation where the government, rather than industry, stepped in to put people to work, we created a plan to supplement the income for our elders, and created a way to bring electricity to those who were still living by candlelight.

He again came before the American people when our Pacific Fleet, and most of our holdings in the Pacific were attacked by the Japanese.  Did he suggest we panic in the light of such overwhelming losses or did he seek to calm and assure the nation that in the end we would persevere?  Did the media of the day question his leadership for not anticipating the attack and making sure the Pacific Fleet was ready for an enemy we knew was increasing its naval force far beyond the limits of the “Five Powers Treaty of 1922.”[3] 

Then in 1960 we elected the first of the leaders coming from what Tom Brokaw would later refer to as “The Greatest Generation.”  John F. Kennedy inspired us from his inauguration with “Ask not what America can do for you, rather ask what you can do for America.”  Did we question his leadership when he cancelled support for the Cuban Invasion (AKA Bay of Pigs), or when we went to the brink of nuclear war with the USSR over Intermediate Range Missiles in Cuba?  In each case he went on television to assure the nation everything would be okay, and the press adored him for it.

The 1980’s brought us Ronald Reagan, a career actor, who knew the power of the media and used it effectively to persuade the nation we could recover from the financial problems brought on by escalating debts from the Vietnam war.  The deficit spending, he put into military arms took the nation deeper into debt, but Americans went back to work, oil shortages ended, the middle class expanded, and in the end he accomplished what no President since Harry Truman was able to. He destroyed the USSR.

The ‘90s gave us George H. Bush who led the nation through an incredibly short and successful, although some believed incomplete, war and into a financial crisis.  He was succeeded by William J. Clinton who taught us that truth depends on the meaning of the word “is.”

So far this century we’ve had George W. Bush, Barrack H. Obama and Donald J. Trump.  The first the media (both News and Hollywood) enjoyed mocking, but supported when he took us to war, first with Afghanistan and then Iraq.  He rallied a country shocked by the terror of September 11, 2001 and guided the nation for eight years.  Barrack Obama came into office on the tails of an economic crisis (perhaps something that links both Bush’s), and promised to unite the nation as no other President ever had the opportunity to, but after his 8-years the nation was just recovering from the economic failures he inherited but he left a legacy of dividing the nation into white and black unlike any of his predecessors.  Yet, the press and Hollywood adored him at the same level they worshiped JFK.

Now we have Donald J. Trump, who came into office despite the best efforts of the DNC and media to vilify him and his supporters.  With his election began the rebellion of the political, media, and social elite who’ve chosen every opportunity to vilify or mock him for his approach to dealing with them.  Rather than accept their mocking, as did the Bush’s, he chose to directly counter-attack their pundits and analysis as “fake news.”  From the first instant when it was clear he had won the election we’ve seen hysterical predictions of doom for the nation.  We can start with Paul Krugman’s prediction the stock market would never recover, and move on to the “not my President” campaign, and the HRC's claims she won the popular vote, as if that was relevant.  In fact, each of the claims by those who supported HRC were only intended to undermine the legitimacy of his win. 

With his inauguration we began the Congressional investigations into his alleged ties with Russia, which we now know were started by the Clinton campaign, and perhaps Hillary herself.  Each week seemed to bring a new promise from Representative Adam Schiff about some new criminal activity only he had knowledge of, but was just about to be revealed.  Again, rather than concede defeat the DNC and its media outlets sought at each stage to show Trump as an incompetent boob, often at the cost of displaying their own incompetence. Of course, this approach has only served to further divide the nation as we seem to tumble willy-nilly into the future. 

We have before us two critical issues: the physical health of the nation from the COVID-19 virus and our economic well-being.  The question for the average American is who do we believe has the best answer to those challenges?

On the one side we have those who’ve said the President is incompetent and has done a poor job leading the nation these past almost four-years.  On the others who believe the President is the duly elected President, who despite his numerous flaws, is responsible for guiding the nation and should be supported. I think the question is really more basic.  In the middle we have the preponderance of media who have a clear agenda against the President and who cherry pick the information they will provide based on that agenda.

Who seems to have the best interests of the nation as a global power at heart?  Is it the media who thrives on controversy, or the social elites who’ve made their fortunes in a system they now disdain?  How about those in Congress who fail each year to perform even their most basic function of passing a budget on time?  How about the unnamed bureaucrats who actually run the nation with little or no accountability, are they the ones? The Governors of the 50-states?  Should we collectively look to them?  How about the spokespeople of the various political entities struggling to gain the wealth of the nation, do they have our best interests as their core belief? 

In this polarized world we see the average citizen has one of three paths to choose.  On the one hand they accept completely the fear the media describes about the dangers of the virus and seek to remain in isolation and would leave the economy in shambles in the hopes the virus will get bored and move on, or we will find some miracle vaccine that will be 100% effective. The opposing side says “screw the virus” let’s go back to life as it was last year and if you get sick you will probably be okay, but if a few people need to die so be it.  Personally, I suspect those two extremes are really very small fractions of our total population, at least that is my hope.  That leaves a sizeable middle ground who is looking for the best risk analysis on how to reopen the economy while maintaining a reasonable level of personal safety. 

The unfortunate fact of today’s world is we really don’t have a unified choice on who we turn to for answers, as we at least thought we did with previous Presidents in earlier generations?  So, good luck with whichever path you choose.

---

[1] https://theodoreroosevelt.org/content.aspx?page_id=22&club_id=991271&module_id=339335

[2] https://history-first.com/2020/03/14/wilson-and-the-1918-flu/

[3] https://www.britannica.com/event/Five-Power-Naval-Limitation-Treaty

It's All About Power and Supremacy

I think we can all agree White Supremacists are to be abhorred.  Those who hold their race is superior to others and has a right, nay a duty, to subjugate other races is the very (read historical) definition of racism.  Unfortunately, that historical definition of racism has been turned on its head to the point that only whites of European ancestry can be classified as racist.  Unless, of course, it suits a particular individual to call someone else a racist in order to dominate the conversation.  It’s kind of like deciding all the sudden you’re an ANTI-fascist and everyone you hate, or who disagrees with you, must be a fascist. By this process, we now identify white supremacists not by their beliefs, but rather by inference.  As Professional Sport teams and players have noted in various protests “If you ain’t with us, you (sic) against us. [1]” 

As the Antifa and Black Lives Matter’s “mostly peaceful” protestors invade the personal space of citizens just trying to live their lives this demand for subservience seems to be growing in fashion. Regardless of how some will portray these demands it is clearly intimidation with the intent to show their power over the helpless. 

After all, politics is all about power.  There are those who have it, and those who want it.  Those who want it are now being empowered by the Democratic party to demonstrate their right to it.  Unfortunately, for the majority of the Democratic party and its voters they don’t understand that once they give authority to those who believe they can demand power by force there will be no way to put that genie back into the bottle.

The real question for the United States, which has seen 240 years of relatively peaceful transference of power and authority is how do we reconcile the wrongs of the past with the desires of the future?

As we debate the changing roles of our various sub-cultures it seems we have put behind us the wisdom of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and others who see the evil of any belief that puts one race above another. 

---

[1] https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/broncos-players-join-protests-as-10th-day-of-demonstrations-take-shape-in-denver