Trump is a symptom.

Trump is a symptom. His "Fifth Ave" supporters are a symptom. The root of the problem is what is going on in society that is making 19th century, continental, Romantic nationalism - with its ethno-centric, authoritarian, and anti-Enlightenment irrationalism attractive to about 1/3 of Americans?

"Tinfoil Hat" Theology Revisited

General Revelation

1. We act as if our decisions and actions matter.
2. The meaning, value, and purpose of our experience is either apparent or real.
3. Naturalism explains our subjective human experience as a self-organizing "operating system" of a human machine which itself is the incidental end product of millennia of random mutations that caused increased survivability for these organisms in their environments.
4. If only apparent - as it appears to be within a purely naturalistic worldview - then all meaningful discussion ends as meaning, value, and purpose are simply random entities within a biological program.
5. If, on the other hand, our experienced belief that our decisions and actions really do matter - that they are real - then they must be supernatural and this, rather than some post-Enlightenment concern regarding whether revelation or miracle violates natural law, is the heart of Christian claims regarding the supernatural.
6. Naturalism can explain our experience but lacks to necessary concepts to validate that experience as real.
7. Whether or not a perceived or reported miracle (event) does or does not appear to stand in contradiction to standards of Enlightenment reason and evidence is of minor concern compared with the disclosure and discernment of ultimate meaning, purpose, and value in the event.

Special Revelation

1. Our life experience is meaningful, valuable, and purposeful.
2. That meaning, value, and purpose is unconditional.
3. That meaning, value, and purpose is ultimately resilient in confrontation with the intimidation, temptation, and aggression of death.

 The Bible and the Christian Tradition

1. The Bible is the authoritative witness to God’s revelation of meaning, purpose, and value in the life of Israel and the early church.
2. The broad, central, Christian tradition is the authoritative interpretation of that witness.
3. Contemporary revelation within and without Christian institutions in our private and public lives occurs in the context of that tradition: we recognize the gospel of God in Christ in our lives as we recognize it in the Bible and the Christian tradition.

The Gospel of God in Christ

1. The problem is human enthrallment to death and our destructive attempts to overcome, evade, or covenant with death.
2. The solution is God in Christ’s ironic victory over death through apparent defeat at its hands.
3. The new human possibility is genuine freedom in regards to death even and especially at those times when death seems ascendant over all human experience, whether private or public.
4. No longer seeking justification and salvation from death for our own lives, we are now free for both private and public efforts to be good stewards of Creation.

The Resistance of All People to the Gospel of God in Christ

All of us, Christian and non-Christian, resist the gospel because it is terrifying. It invites us to abandon our own personally and socially destructive means of securing relief from death and to instead, in our naked and terrible vulnerability, find God in Christ's salvation in the very midst of death's feigned rule. God in Christ has overcome death on a cross rather than a throne and calls us to do the same. And that is not the gospel we want to hear. So while the decision to accept the gospel may (or may not) come to a focus at one particularly significant point in our biography it is a decision that will be revisited as death continues to confront us every day of our lives even as we grow in confidence that God in Christ can be trusted onto death.

Democracy, Globalization, Nationalism... Pick two out of three?

"I have an "impossibility theorem" for the global economy that is like that. It says that democracy, national sovereignty and global economic integration are mutually incompatible: we can combine any two of the three, but never have all three simultaneously and in full."

The inescapable trilemma of the world economy (Dani Rodriks)

Rapid Social Change and Deviance

Trump must be removed from office, peacefully and constitutionally, as soon as possible. But that won't solve the problem.

The problem is that the folks who voted for him - and maybe more - will vote for a more accomplished, polished, politically-savvy Trump.

And the reason is not that they are bad people. (Some no doubt, like the rest of us, are - it would be miraculous if none were.)

The reason is that the processes of globalism, information technology, and - soon, robotics - are  dividing city folks from rural folks, globalists from nationalists, the rich from the poor (at the expense of the shrinking middle class) and causing the "losers" in those battles to feel their culture (that is, their world, their reality) is under siege and to feel  culturally, socially, and economically left behind and alienated.

FERTILE GROUND FOR FASCISM AND OTHER EXTREMIST IDEOLOGIES.

"Merton defines culture as an "organized set of normative values governing behavior which is common to members of a designated society or group". Social structures are the "organized set of social relationships in which members of the society or group are variously implicated".[18] Anomie, the state of normlessness, arises when there is "an acute disjunction between the cultural norms and goals and the socially structured capacities of members of the group to act in accord with them".[18] In his theory, Merton links anomie with deviance and argues that the discontinuity between culture and structure have the dysfunctional consequence of leading to deviance within society.[19]"

Robert K. Merton (Theory of Deviance)

CONFEDERNAZIS & THE ALT-RIGHT

The Alt-Right asserts a 19th century continental European nationalism of ethnic, racial, linguistic, cultural cohesion (along with Christendom's centuries-long anti-Semitism) that only later metastasized into full blown fascism.

But it took some specific ideologues to lead one strand of that nationalism into racial supremacy and purity on steroids combined with propaganda and violence as alternate paths to political power.

Nonetheless, it is an understanding of nationalism very different from the Enlightenment values of reason, liberty, progress, tolerance, constitutional government, and secularism that forms the basis of American nationalism as envisioned by the founders, the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.

Confedernazis are violent by definition. There ARE no pacifist Confedernazis who believe in democratic process and the rule of law. THIS IS THE DISTINCTION between them and social / economic conservatives, on the one hand, and Pat Buchanan Alt-Right nativists and racial or ethnic supremacists on the other.

All Confedernazis are alt-right. Not all alt-right are Confedernazis as they have not crossed the line to violence over democratic process (though some Confedernazis USE democratic process to their temporary pathway to power as did Mussolini and Hitler).

I would advise folks to not be so naïve as to think one is rallying to preserve history when the folks next to you are wearing hoods and militia uniforms (and weapons) and shouting slogans and carrying symbolism associated with the Klan and Nazi rallies.

THESE PEOPLE ARE IMPLICITLY AND EXPLICITLY THREATENING AND SOMETIMES INSTIGATING VIOLENCE. DON'T BE AN EFFING IDIOT.

ROBERT E. LEE ON WAR MONUMENTS

"Lexington, VA., August 5, 1869.

"Dear Sir--

"Absence from Lexington has prevented my receiving until to-day your letter of the 26th ult., inclosing an invitation from the Gettysburg Battle-field Memorial Association, to attend a meeting of the officers engaged in that battle at Gettysburg, for the purpose of marking upon the ground by enduring memorials of granite the positions and movements of the armies on the field.

"My engagements will not permit me to be present. I believe if there, I could not add anything material to the information existing on the subject. I think it wiser, moreover, not to keep open the sores of war but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavored to obliterate the marks of civil strife, to commit to oblivion the feelings engendered.

"Very respectfully,
"Your obedient servant,
"R. E. Lee. "

Republican Vindicator, September 03, 1869

WHAT THIS MAY COME TO

I'm becoming convinced that in a true crisis he would be deposed by a military coup. It's the only thing that would be fast enough. A less drastic form (but more legal form) would be refusing to obey an illegal order. But Trump could, of course, always find someone who would obey it (the way Nixon kept firing people until he got to Robert Bork, who obeyed him, during the Saturday Night Massacre).

Per Seymour Hersh, such a coup was contemplated before Nixon resigned in August '74.

**************************************
[April '74] In April of 1974, Joseph Laitin, a public-affairs official who had served in the Johnson White House, telephoned Schlesinger. Although Laitin was a liberal Democrat, the two had become friends early in the Nixon Administration, after Laitin was reassigned as a press official in the Bureau of the Budget, where Schlesinger was in charge of analyzing defense and intelligence programs. They had remained close as Schlesinger moved up in the government—to chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission in 1971, director of the Central Intelligence Agency in February of 1973, and to the Pentagon in May. Laitin broached some of his fears: Was it possible for the President of the United States to authorize the use of nuclear weapons without his secretary of defense knowing it? What if Nixon, ordered by the Supreme Court to leave office, refused to leave and called for the military to surround the Washington area? Who was in charge then? Whose orders would be obeyed in a crisis? "If I were in your job," Laitin recalls telling Schlesinger, "I would want to know the location of the combat troops nearest to downtown Washington and the chain of command." Schlesinger said only, "Nice talking to you," and hung up.

*   *   *

[Late July '74] Bearing that in mind, and aware that Brown [Chairman of the Joint Chiefs - Bill B] had taken an oath of office that made him responsible to Nixon as Commander-in-Chief, Schlesinger trod delicately during their talk. His goal was to express his concerns about the White House and somehow to get Brown to reach the same conclusion that he himself had already reached. In essence, Schlesinger asked Brown for a commitment that neither he nor any of the other chiefs would respond to an order from the White House calling for the use of military force without immediately informing Schlesinger.

The Pardon (The Atlantic)

Experience with violence

I've read (but cannot currently find) articles asserting that a primary precursor of whether or not an extremist (whether Islamic or white supremacist) crosses the threshold to violence correlates more with a past history of violent experience (whether as a victim, perpetrator, or witness) than ideology.

Looking back over the last few years it seems as if most perpetrators either had backgrounds in violence or in other criminal activity and often very tenuous connections with the associated ideology.

Simply having extreme views is generally not enough to predict violent action on those views. Many folks have extreme views.

"James Alex Fields Jr. was barely a teenager in 2010 when his mother — who uses a wheelchair — locked herself in a bathroom, called 911 and said her son had struck her head and put his hands over her mouth when she told him to stop playing a video game, according to police records. On another occasion, records show, he brandished a 12-inch knife. Once, he spit in her face."

‘Very threatening’: Mother of Charlottesville suspect James A. Fields called 911 twice (Washington Post)

America Between Scylia and Charybdis

AMERICA & THE WORLD needs an alternative to today's Scylia and Charybdis: an unthinkable and unnecessary conventional / nuclear holocaust and an unthinkable and necessary American military coup to prevent that holocaust.

Because neither impeachment nor the 25th Amendment may be fast enough.

May God save America and America's constitutional form of government AND a suffering world from two nuclear-armed madmen.

Between Scylla and Charybdis

No wonder the elite mock them!

JUST WHILE I WAS REPENTING of my elitist ways after hearing Congressman Dent tell us these coal miners and assembly line Trump supporters just want to be respected AND having finished "The Retreat of Western Liberalism" by Edward Luce in which he says much the same thing, I FIND THIS NONSENSE POSTED BY ONE SUCH. (He works at a call center, not a factory, but call centers ARE the new factories.)

TRUMP SUPPORTERS - You want respect? Don't say such effing IGNORANT things as my friend (and he IS my friend) is saying.

I'll respect your hard work, your love of family, your ethical seriousness, the degree to which your livelihoods and paychecks have been diminished over the last 40 years (AS HAVE MINE)... but I CANNOT respect your belief in Breitbart, InfoWars, Russia Today, and other crackpot nonsense.

SLAP YOURSELVES!
For those on planet earth, feel free to cut and paste for YOUR Trump idiot friends.

And so it begins...

TRUMP DORK: you have plenty demonstrably false facts.

You accuse the president of colluding with Russia to beat Hillary without any evidence whatsoever up to this minute, none.

When you are ideologically driven apparently again facts, evidence, proof-- all those things don't matter.

This is why it's hard to take you seriously.

You're ready to impeach on a technicality.

You know that's a reflection of your weak philosophy don't you?

RESPONSE:

"You accuse the president of colluding with Russia"

I have never accused Trump of colluding with Russia.

I have accused him of LYING about his and his campaigns' CONNECTIONS to the Russian government (as in Don Jr's "oh, goody!" response to the Russian governments offer of dirt on Hillary), Jared Kushner's meeting with a sanctioned Russian bank that does not operate as a bank, has had one employee imprisioned as a Russian spy and whose top guy - the guy Kushner met with - was hand-picked by Putin after the guy graduated from Russian spy school. Also, Trump's odd good fortune when it comes to killer real estate deals with Russian oligarchs, and his campaign manager (Manafort) and erstwhile National Security Advisor (Flynn) being on the payroll of foreign governments (the pro-Putin Ukrainian president, Turkey) promoting the interests of Russian oligarchs.

As usual you have no clue as to what is going on. Every one of the clauses above have been verified BY Don Jr., real estate transactions records, Kushner, Manafort and Flynn.

Now we're going to see if any of that - and, I suspect, MUCH, MUCH, more - rises to the level of collusion in the expert opinion of the Special Prosecutor, his highly capable attorneys with specialties in RICO and money laundering and the all-powerful DC grand jury they have assembled.

Oh. And obstruction of justice. Of COURSE I fired Comey because of Russia, he says, to NBC news and Russian diplomats IN THE OVAL OFFICE.

Again, demonstrably true per NBC's video and the White House read-out on the Oval Office meeting.

But do go on about my "demonstrably false facts."

How about refuting some of them? :-) :-) :-)

I AGREE WITH PAUL RYAN.

I AGREE WITH PAUL RYAN. Damn. Did I say that out loud, or just think it? :-)

A leak can mean I'm party to an off-the-record lunch with Trump but then anonymously leak what was said. Impolite and grounds for termination if an employee. But not illegal.

The leaks that count are leaks from classified information that comes into one's possession through one's professional employment. Leaks that endanger the means and methods by which the government acquired the information (such "means and methods" possibly including an individual whose life has just been put at risk).

If that employee determines, for whatever reason, to leak that information to the journalist it is fair game for the media outlet to make that public... AFTER confirming the information with the government and making whatever reasonable redactions the government requests... then that is on the leaker and the press HAS NO RESPONSIBILITY to give up their source to the government.

Now, if the journalist IN ANY WAY encourages or enables or assists the leaker in leaking, then they share - morally and legally - the guilt of the leaker.

If the individual who leaked the contents of Flynn's intercepted (presumably by the NSA, CIA, or FBI) call to the Russian ambassador at the end of December is caught, their career is ruined and they'll probably go to jail. And, legally, they should.

However, had they not leaked that, we would still have a foreign agent as National Security Advisor, James Comey would still be head of the FBI, and we would not have a Special Prosecutor who - I am convinced - WILL get to the bottom of who did what in the election.

So, legally, guilty. Morally, God knows. Historical legacy?

They may yet be naming elementary schools after him or her.

"Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) defended journalists Friday, saying that while intelligence leaks compromise national security, it's "the problem of the leaker, not the journalist."  

""Leaks are concerning because leaks can often compromise national security, but that’s the problem of the leaker not the journalist," Ryan said at an event in Muskego, Wis., on Friday afternoon."

Paul Ryan: Intel leaks 'the problem of the leaker, not the journalist' (The Hill)