There are two distinct frameworks that a person can employ to understand the world and they rarely overlap: Mythos and Logos. Mythos uses a frame of reference that is based on anecdotes, story-telling, and shared communal belief. Logos uses a frame of reference that employs empirical evidence, critical thinking and impartiality. From these Greek words we derive the English “myth” and “logic.”
Modern American conservatives appear to have lost their intellectual moorings, especially as they have allowed themselves to be dragged to the irrational right wing fringe by the Tea Party, and others. They have become far more animated by their own invented mythology than facts or evidence. The immediately dismiss any evidence that is contrary to their mythology as false or manipulated. This explains the constant carping about the “Main Stream Media” being controlled by [insert your favorite liberal villain here], while they rely on news sources like Fox, World Net Daily, Brietbart, Washington Times, Limbaugh and countless other right wing outlets. They are as information-myopic as any liberal about which they bitterly complain.
This is one important reason that it is nearly impossible to have a rational, civil, and respectful exchange of ideas with them. Any person who dares challenges their mythical narratives is, by definition, a defective human being hell-bent on destroying America. As I noted in a previous post, Report From the Fever Swamp, their default response to any challenge is insult and vulgarity, while ignoring whatever merits the challenge may have. They have become masters of changing the subject.
So with this post, I begin a series on right-wing mythology. First Edition: Job Creators.
The right wing loves to carp incessantly about the Job Creators and how if the Government would just get off their backs, get out of their way, etc., the Job Creators could get on with the work of, you know, creating jobs.
There! The only thing standing between the return of prosperity and the rousing chorus of Happy Days Are Here Again are the evil liberals and their primary tool for Destroying America—the Big Government.
There are two basic problems with this myth: first of all, it is only a thin proxy for the real argument: keep taxes low on the already rich, and secondly, it is not supported by either entry-level economics or any objective evidence.
This mythical narrative simply ignores demand. If the job creators are “allowed” to prosper by virtue of low taxes and deregulation then they will be able to offer a richer variety of goods and services (increase the supply, better known as “Supply Side Economics”) which will, in turn create economic growth and create the jobs. The dark side of the argument of course, is that the rich do not get their low taxes and deregulation, then they simply “go on strike” and simply not create the jobs or the growth that everyone wants. The Speaker of the House actually made this argument.
In the right wing mythical world, all business investment decisions are made by rich guys sitting around and deciding how much of a snit they are in about their marginal tax rates. Of course, this is preposterous. If there is sufficient demand for a product or service, someone will meet that demand with whatever investment is required. If the demand cannot be met profitably, then supply will not be created.
High taxes or regulations do not kill job creation. It is lack of demand.
If high taxes kill jobs, and low taxes create jobs, then someone must explain Alabama. Alabama has the third lowest all-in tax rate in the nation, yet it is among the most impoverished. California, on the other hand, has very high all-in tax rates yet is among the most prosperous in the nation.
The argument can be extended to every Red State, with the exception of Texas. As I noted in a prior post, Red states receive more in Federal benefits than the taxes they pay. Of the 18 states that pay more in Federal taxes than the benefits they receive, 17 are Blue.
The Red state legislatures are in the firm control of the Republican party. Yet they lag far behind the Blue states in any measure of economic prosperity. If the right wing mythos were based in fact, why is California not being subsidized by Alabama instead of the other way around?
Anyone trying to have a rational conversation with a right wing extremist should never underestimate the power of myth. Also, in the words of an early mentor—you should never try to teach a pig to sing. You will just frustrate yourself and annoy the pig.
I had hoped to post nothing more about our High Plains Grifter Cliven Bundy. He is, after all, an inconsequential little man with a petty grievance against the Federal government—a grievance about which he is clearly wrong, as decided several times in various courts. Most people were not at all charmed by his cowboy hat, homespun dialect, and his inability to string together two coherent sentences. Except for Sean Hannity, of course.
Once again, he is, quite inadvertently, illustrating something important that we need to pay attention to. The important part of this circus are the “militia” men who have found something to do other than tromp around the woods on the weekends playing soldier.
They have flocked to Nevada to protect our grifter from the tyranny of the rule of law, due process, and the property rights of everyone except for the grifter himself. After all, who needs laws when you have guns?
They have stuck with him even after he revealed himself to be a deeply ignorant, racist buffoon (who could have seen that coming?).
But now they have gone a step further. They have set up “check points” to verify the local residence of any citizen who happens to be travelling down a road that they are blocking. Again, who needs laws when you have guns?
So we are left to wonder what happens when a person decides not to comply with their orders or not to stop at their “check point”?
Do they open fire? Do they kill an innocent citizen for the crime of not recognizing their self-proclaimed authority to decide who is allowed to travel freely on a public road?
Fun Fact: since 9/11, right-wing extremists have killed more Americans than jihadi extremists.
(Note: Word Press is having some trouble connecting to the embedded link. Gere it is:
http://digitaljournal.com/news/politics/since-9-11-right-wing-violence-has-killed-more-in-us-than-jihad/article/381055)
It is time for legal authorities to end this circus and send the soldier-boy wannabes back to the woods.
In a prior post I posed a rhetorical question—with all of the bluster coming from the NRA and extremists gun owners about the need to have their little arsenals to combat government tyranny—what would the resistance actually look like if it ever had to leave the realm of empty chest thumping posturing and actually be put into practice?
Recently, the extremists provided a not so rhetorical answer. Enter Cliven Bundy, and his chief cheerleader, Sean Hannity.
Cliven is a dyspeptic angry white guy with a cowboy hat and some guns. That makes him a “good” guy by definition among right wing extremists. Also, he is a Nevada cattle rancher who denies the existence of the Federal government and appears to have no regard for property rights, other than his own. He does not mind having the benefits of being a citizen of a government that he denies exists. He will take the benefits-but the obligations that go with it? NO SIR!
Cliven owns a 160-acre ranch out in the brush land—a plot too small to support the grazing needs of his cattle. Like thousands of other ranchers in these same circumstances, he grazes his cattle on vast tracts of Federally owned land. Unlike most other ranchers in the West, Cliven refuses to obtain permits and pay the required fees for the commercial use of the public property.
In other words, Cliven is a either freeloader, welfare cheat or a thief. Take your pick. One thing he is not is a patriot.
But Cliven is more than a little savvy about public relations and media management—especially in the manipulation of right wing media like Fox. So with a little help from the ever-gullible Sean Hannity, this little land-use dispute (which has been going on for decades) erupted into a media firestorm, which brought the militia-type gun nuts streaming to the scene to protect this poor farmer from the tyranny of the Federal government.
What is interesting is not Cliven, who is, after all, just an inconsequential little man with a petty grudge against the Federal government. What is very interesting, however, is the response of the gun-nut militia loonies.
THIS is the issue that provokes them to rush to Nevada and take up arms against tyranny: to protect the God-given right for Cliven to appropriate land that he does not own for his own commercial gain.
Fortunately, the Bureau of Land Management deescalated the situation, knowing full well that a few hundred trespassing cows was not worth bloodshed. They, after all, have other means.
Not so the self-appointed “militias”. As I watched them “deploy” on the highway overpass with their (presumably) loaded weapons trained on sworn Peace Officers, it occurred to me that they had answered my rhetorical question from last summer. The Revolution will be televised.
And this is what it will look like.
We will have the gun nut manly men standing around a microphone “protecting” the right wing hero de jour, with their arms crossed, scowls, store bought camo pants, sunglasses, faux-military badges (Pretorian Guard! Scared yet?) looking all bad-ass. They will be signaling that yes, they are quite willing to shed blood over this or that petty grievance against the tyrants. Especially if the tyranny involves some land use regulations that keep free loaders from stealing from the rest of us.
Then there will be the snipers who will transform themselves from patriots to cop killers.
The tactics they would employ take a page from Saddam Hussain (putting civilians in high value bombing targets): Former Sherriff Richard Mack advocates putting the women between the tough bad-asses and the constabulary.
Why, one might ask? Because it would make great TV of course. Former Sheriff Mack proclaims::
We were actually strategizing to put all the women up at the front,” he said. “If they are going to start shooting, it’s going to be women that are going to be televised all across the world getting shot by these rogue federal officers.”
Hannity must beside himself anticipating the ratings bump.
Not to worry. Former Sheriff Mack is no coward. He promises that when the women are killed on TV, he would be right behind:
I would have been next. I would have been the next one to be killed. I’m not afraid to die here, I’m willing to die here. But the best ploy would have been to have had women in front…
A grateful nation sighs with relief.
But this would be just the opening act. I think we all know what the closing act will be, especially if one of these sacrificial women manages to kill a police officer. How long would these tough guys and their sacrificial women hold their concrete barricade on the overpass when the helicopters negate whatever protection they think they have shooting through the narrow slits in the concrete? My guess it will take less than two minutes before the tough guys with their AR-15s, scowls, store bought camo pants, sunglasses, faux-military badges take for the hills.
Maybe they will leave the women behind in a rear guard action so they might escape.
Of course, they could go out Symbionese Liberation Army style and all die in the great confrontation. But they don’t appear to have that kind of motivation. I could be wrong.
I will close with another rhetorical question: What would the country be like if these bad asses showed up to protect an inner city kid from out of control police?
The family of Oscar Grant knows government tyranny.
Update April 24, 2014
Now that Cliven Bundy has shared with us his views on “the Negro”, he has revealed himself to be not only a crank and a grifter, but a deeply ignorant racist as well. The conservative media, who had lionized him a week ago, are fleeing like the devil flees holy water.
Especially Hannity, who tried to exploit this delusional old fool for a ratings bump. All of this was predictable, interesting, but ultimately, not important.
The fascinating part of this turn of events, is the response of the “militia” loonies who remain on the scene, guarding this fraud from government tyranny. It looks like they are standing by their man, freedom lovers that they are. Now we know why these bad asses do not rush to the defense of young inner city people who suffer government tyranny every day in the form of abusive police power.
They will not admit it, but their actions speak far louder than their words. Race matters.
http://benswann.com/truth-did-bundy-ranch-protesters-put-women-between-themselves-and-armed-federal-agents/
The Biblical literalists are again making fools of themselves for choosing to be in the wrong fight. Because they are trapped by the ideological chains of the literal truth of every word in their version of the Holy text, they have managed to frame the discussion, that they started, in such a way that there is only one outcome: they lose. They keep insisting on trying to answer how questions with why answers. More on that later.
They are reacting badly to the reboot of Cosmos, hosted by Neil DeGrasse Tyson. Cosmos is a brilliantly conceived and beautifully produced revisit of the original brainchild of Carl Sagan. Both the story and the science are compelling, and anyone graduating from high school should be at least conversant with the basics of the series.
But noted Biblical literalists are unhappy because it does not conform to what they consider to be the teachings of their religious faith. They are upset that the series does not give their views equal time, or even a mention.
But they are wasting their time on the wrong fight. No serious or educated person is going to debate or even discuss Creationism (except for Bill Nye, who only managed to add false credence to their stubborn insistence in believing non-facts). They can push as hard as they want about Intelligent Design (the teaching of which in public schools has been ruled illegal) or smugly point out that Evolution is merely a “theory” (showing that they completely misunderstand the meaning of the word when used in a scientific context.) There is a cottage industry on the web devoted to promoting Creationism and trying to debunk science.
Although they don’t quite yet get it, but scientific knowledge and progress is happy to keep moving forward without them. Although they can retard this progress at the margins by teaching pseudo-science in the various Christian academies and other private schools (and surprisingly, at taxpayers expense in some schools), the only thing they are really accomplishing is not preparing their unfortunate students to compete in a modern, globalized, information-rich world. They are however, preparing their students for a life of poverty and isolation. Fortunately, the smart ones will eventually find a way to overcome this handicap.
The more they try to defend Creationism, the more ridiculous they sound. Here are two arguments for Creationism that I have come across on the internet in the wake of the Cosmos kerfuffle:
- In trying to “prove” that a vessel (Noah’s Ark) of the dimensions described in the Bible could, in fact, hold two of every animal on earth including those not indigenous to the immediate area: God probably miniaturized the animals and miraculously had them all lined up and ready to go! Microbes are not mentioned, even though they are the basic building blocks of life. But then, Bronze Age story-tellers did not know about microbes, did they?
- In trying to reconcile the fossil record with the Young Earth Creationists story: Jesus put those dinosaur bones in the various levels of the Earth’s crust to test our faith!
This, of course, is the kind of groan-inducing, head-slapping nonsense that makes the ardent Biblical literalists appear to be nothing more than home-schooled, ignorant rubes. If their prime mission in life is to spread the Gospel, then turning themselves into clowns with size 24 shoes is not going to help.
When fundamentalist Christians get wrapped around this axle, they are doing their faith and their message a great disservice. This nonsense does not invalidate their primary message, only obscures it and makes it especially difficult for the young, the educated and the reasonable to even see it. We are starting to see genuine declines in religious affiliation, in no small part due to this incoherent gibberish.
That’s why I think they have picked the wrong fight.
Stephan Jay Gould, in his 1997 book Rocks of Ages, offered an elegant way to reconcile scientific fact with religious belief. He introduced the concept of Non-Overlapping Magisteria.
His solution? Don’t try. They are irreconcilable. But that does not mean that one invalidates the other. I cannot do his formulation justice in a brief blog post, and I admit that I may have some things wrong. But I will offer my take-away, in the hope that it may be thought-provoking for some people.
There are two fundamental questions essential to the human spirit. Wrestling with both questions is fundamental to not only our existence but to our progress. They are also required to keep our big mammalian brains busy. The questions are how and why. Science concerns itself with how. Religious belief systems (should) concern themselves with why.
The two should not cross, thus Non-Overlapping.
Take for example, global warming (if you are one of the dwindling minority who deny global warming, or question our agency in it, then read no further. This part will only piss you off and I am not in the least interested in your ignorant hate mail. Science does not require your endorsement to be true.) Scientists have done a very good job of documenting and explaining the how of global warming. We all know the story—carbon emissions, rising average global temperatures, ocean acidification, charting the time until the collapse of various ocean ecosystems and the rest of it. But even when they try to explain why—industrial revolution, burning fossil fuels, increasing worldwide affluence, etc., they are still stuck in the how.
Getting to the why requires reflection on the nature of man, our place in the Universe, our destructive and wasteful nature and even sin itself. Honest reflection on these matters requires an intellectual, moral, philosophical and spiritual framework that science cannot hope to provide.
Another example is the Biblical story of Noah’s Ark, and another mini-kerfuffle because of the movie Noah. The Biblical story is an extinction story. We know from the fossil record there have been five great extinction events in the Earth’s history (the Permian extinction came terrifyingly close to wiping out all multi-celled organisms on the planet.) Some scientists are becoming convinced that we are in the midst of a sixth great extinction, this one caused by us. But that’s the how part of the extinction story.
But isn’t the Noah story also about the why? Isn’t the story ultimately about the destructiveness of sin and the power of redemption? Science cannot answer these questions-but these questions are every bit as important to the human experience as the scientific how.
So when Biblical literalists get into these fights about the plausibility of the Ark actually holding two of every animal on Earth, or how an ancient wooden craft could withstand rainfall of six inches per minute for 40 days and nights and survive, they are obscuring, in fact missing altogether, the deeper spiritual questions of why. After all, Bangladesh goes through periods of rains lasting 40 days and 40 nights every year and we are all still here.
The Noah story could not possibly be literally true, any more than God created the universe in six days (the sun wasn’t created until day four, after all) and the Earth is not 6,000 years old. But there is spiritual truth to all of these stories. A truth that will remain obscure as long as the Biblical literalists continue to stubbornly cling to this demonstrable nonsense.
The Biblical literalists should stop trying to make their faith answer the how questions. It is a losing game for them—and besides, we have science for that.
It was bound to happen sooner or later. I would have bet on later—but sooner it is. Just as the 2016 Republican hopefuls are piling into the GOP Primaries Clown Car for another hilarious run, the darling of the GOP moderates (the few of them that are left), Gov. Chris Christie (R-NJ) is stepping (or being dragged) out. Not that Gov. Christie knows it just yet, but the Clown Car is leaving him by the side of the road. Next stop—Crazy Town!
The George Washington Bridge scandal should have surprised no one—especially those that have followed his career. The pettiness of the revenge, the naked abuse of the public trust, and the complete disregard of the people (including their safety) who entrusted him with this office is signature Christie.
Its hard to believe that this was the Republican’s best hope of winning the White House. But he was, and he is no more. Farewell Gov. Christie, the sane will miss you.
So the Clown Car still has several passengers. The most prominent are Ted “Shutdown the Government Tail Gunner” Cruz, Marco “Flip-Flopping” Rubio (this should provide some happy memories for former Romney supporters), Jeb “Really, I’m Not THAT Bush” Bush and Rand “Not Quite On This Planet” Paul. Not surprisingly all three have been dropping in the polls like gangsters with cement shoes on their way to sleep with the fishes.
There are second and third tier riders, of course, hoping for their opportunity to drive. Rick “Church Lady” Santorum and Bobby “I Have No Idea What the First Amendment Means” Jindal can hardly wait to get their hands on the wheel. But the deeper Republicans dive into the barrel, the more likely the rodeo of 2012 will repeat itself.
As in 2012, each will get their turn, and every new driver will be more hilarious than the one before. I can only hope that Herman Cain sees his great opportunity for the prize and jumps back in. It’s just not quite as crazy without him.
So to the other delusional extremists who not have figured out that the country has moved beyond their garden variety lunacy, and also have not figured out a way to gerrymander the entire nation, I say welcome! Plenty of room in the Clown Car.
In two days, an armistice will be in effect for the War on Christmas.
Christmas will come home at last, released from the annual six weeks Fox News pageant known as the War on Christmas. A war perpetrated by [insert your favorite villain here]. At least the War accomplished one thing: Santa is white. No one died in vain.
On Christmas we can overstuff ourselves on vast amounts of food that we do not need, while scarcely thinking of those among us who have little nothing to eat.
We will open our presents of cheap Chinese baubles that have become the modern day substitutes of love, while thinking nothing of the hordes of underpaid retail workers who were forced to work on the Holidays and put up with our crap so we could get our hands on those cheap Chinese baubles. And of course, we will not think of the violence that erupted in several retail stores as we trampled over each other to get to those towels on special.
We will spend the day dozing through football, without a thought of those who have died from hypothermia, no farther away from us than a bicycle ride.
There will be a ticker tape parade in New York to honor the Fox News personalities who went to war on our behalf. And we will all join in on a rousing chorus of When Christmas Comes Marching Home Again, Hurrah! Hurrah!
The nation rejoices.