Didja Ever?

 Didja Ever?

Did you ever think that you would …? Truthfully, when I was 12 years old I was more worried about getting to thirteen. Today my twelve-year plan seems ambitious.

I don’t think you think about getting to eighty-five until you’re eighty-four. Even at thirty, forty seemed a long way away.

Recently I was thinking about hosting a party when I turned eighty-five. Truth is, there aren’t many people in the same age bracket to invite. Too many long-time friends have moved to warmer climates, moved to senior assisted living, or moved on to …

So what accounts for some of us making it to a ripe old age while others don’t? There were twelve of us in my eighth-grade class. Seven of us still communicate occasionally during the year. A good number of high school classmates still send out the occasional email. Some, through no fault of their own, receive the occasional rant from an audacious blogger. I’ve noticed a lot of occasional occupies in the later years.

Some say genes have a lot to do with the aging process. That may be part of the equation. I’ll accept it since my biological father reached ninety-four without much trouble. He had a good ten-year plan too.

With absolutely no attempt at in-depth research, ("l'audace, toujours l'audace,”) I’m thinking that making it to thirty is pure dumb luck. If you can stay out of a shooting war, live in a safe area, work in a safe environment, and don’t act too stupid, your chances are reasonably good. You can stay out of a shooting war unless your number comes up, you can move to a safer neighborhood if you have to, and you can change jobs if you don’t feel safe. Stupid is another story. You can’t fix stupid! (I’ve waited years to use that cliché.)

The early years were easier. We lived in a nice quiet town in the mountains of Vermont. Quiet was an understatement. Family, church, school, scouts, and college made up most of our lives, the better part of Eisenhower’s calm leadership. Life was predictable for middle-class French-Canadian families in a town with a large French-Canadian population; French church, French school, French hospital, French friends, until it wasn’t. After attending an all-boys school for eight years, taught by nuns mostly from Canada, entering the local high school with men and women lay teachers, and girls was a bit of a shock. I still remember the first period of my first day at that school. The teacher asked me to multiply numbers and letters. It had to be a trick question, right? He called it algebra.  I adjusted less quickly than my counterparts. I’m still working on it.

After college, I taught school for a few years and then moved into the business world. My first gig was as a trainer for a commodity brokerage firm. They wanted a school teacher who didn’t know how to trade pork bellies and soybeans or copper. I was the perfect choice. That led to training positions at a couple of chemical companies. When the call came from my former boss to move to San Francisco as Director of Training for a major drug distributor, we made the hard decision. We would go for two years, soak up some California sun and lifestyle, and then go back to St. Louis. That was fifty years ago this month, Didja Ever?

That period between twenty-four and forty years is always a whirlwind. Commuting to The City every day, constant flights cross country, and up and down the country, weekends at the kids' activities, and just trying to keep up. Didja ever think you would make it to forty?

I never really thought about it. I should have paid better attention. In April of that year I collapsed at a meeting I was facilitating; gangrenous gall bladder it was. Later in October, I had open heart surgery, a big deal back then, triple bypass. The doctor told me it was good for about twelve or thirteen years. I’d say he exceeded customer expectations. Didja ever think about making it to fifty? Yes!

I was thinking about retiring at sixty or sixty-five when my employer decided that a bunch of us fifty-five-year-olds had outspent our usefulness. They thought I would do better as an independent consultant. I had been with them for twenty years, but I’ve been collecting retirement checks for thirty years, so far. Getting older is the best revenge.

Ya, but didja ever think about getting to eighty-five. Not until I was eighty-four. It seems that special events get closer as one ages. “He’s forty, that’s a big one. We should have a party. He’s fifty. Wow, let’s have a fifty’s party. He’s sixty. That’s a big one too. He’s sixty-five… He’s seventy… He’s seventy-five … “ and it goes on. The gathering at eighty-seven should be a barn burner. Didja ever think about being ninety. Starting to.

I went to the doctor the other day. He thought my odds were good. He said I was in good shape for the shape I’m in (cliches abound) and the age I’m carrying, despite parts giving up or slowing down, or getting heavier. I had to fill out a questionnaire about how much alcohol I drank. I asked him if two glasses of wine with dinner were too much. “What the hell, at your age, enjoy.” I’m trying to make that into a positive. I’m not happy when he laughs at my ten-year plan.

I’m not sure why I’m worked up over this whole thing. Most of my grade school and high school classmates and friends from back then are a year older than me and seem OK with it all. But the statistics are a bit scary. Only 21% of men in the U.S. make it to eighty-five. It’s a bit weird, but nearly 20% also make it to ninety years old. But only six percent make it to one hundred years old. So a ten-year plan seems reasonable but a fifteen-year plan is a stretch and will need some effort. Didja ever think about making it to one hundred? I’ll worry about that when I hit ninety-five.

In the meantime, if two glasses of wine with dinner are OK, three might be better.

 

Chuck Woods

April 1, 1939 –

 

 

 

 

 

IDs and Voting!

I went to the doctor the other day. They wanted to see my ID even after I had shown them my insurance card. The doctor sent me to the X-ray department for, you know, an X-ray. They asked for my ID after I showed them my insurance card. I went to the bank the other day. You know, I actually walked into the building. It was the same as I remembered it from a few years ago. They asked to see my ID. I had an issue with my cable company. After I gave them my phone number they wanted to see my ID.

 

I am not supposed to say this, but I am in favor of requiring a valid ID to vote. Now, a valid ID can take many forms. Let us start with the basic ones, a driver’s license or a state photo ID. The liberals of the world will tell you that puts too much of a burden on poor people and people in rural areas and just about anywhere else. I know I am on the left end of the right wing or the right end of the left-wing, whatever, but I can tell you that is hogwash. I am not sure what hogwash is, but that is what no-ID-to-vote is.

 

In my state, people are registered to vote automatically when they apply for a driver’s license or for a state photo ID. When they change their name or address, they must notify the DMV to update their license which automatically updates their voter information. The real point is that a person must opt out of registering to vote, rather than opting in. Some states make the registration process difficult, discouraging some folks from voting.

 

While at the medical center, ( I don’t want to be judgmental) most folks did not appear to be living in the world of high-priced purses and yet they all showed their photo IDs after showing their insurance card.

 

Liberals around the country tell us that it is too difficult for poor people to get government-issued IDs. I don’t know about the rest of the country, but what I see most days are people of all economic levels who already have government-issued IDs. The liberals need to stop with the shibboleth. The conservatives worry that non-citizens will pack the voting booths or that dead people will vote in masses. No data proves that happens, except maybe in Chicago where folklore tells us that voting early and often is a local mantra. But that’s Chicago.

 

State legislatures have been on a tear in the last few years looking for new ways and old ways to limit voting by folks who do not support their ruling party. They started with Gerrymandering, moved on to exhaustive voter registration processes, minimized voting hours in fewer and fewer locations, and where it is against the law to offer water to those standing in line to vote. They are really good at it.

 

But here is the rub. In our democracy, unbridled voting sets us apart from those countries that use voting as a coverup for autocrats who tell the people they are fighting for democracy, like Russia or Hungary. The people gather periodically to cast a vote. The winner is the one with the most votes, and we move on. To my mind, any attempt to jiggle that easy process is undemocratic and a violation of American values. We are the nation that is supposed to be the city on the hill, the bright light for others to follow. We were that a few years ago. Today, not so much.

 

Why not have a national policy for who votes in national elections? It is really easy to do. Everyone over the age of eighteen is automatically registered to vote by the state DMV. Every registered voter is sent a ballot that they return to vote-gathering locations close to home, bring to an election center, or mail in. Full stop!

 

Why is this important? People need to have faith in our election systems. If everyone is required to show their ID when they register to vote or at the local vote center, more people will have trust in the process. If our state legislatures would make voter registration easy but verifiable, we would eliminate four years of people baying in the wind about a stolen election that wasn’t.

 

I want to know that everyone who votes is a citizen with a valid ID. I want to know that getting a valid ID is easy. It seems an easy solution to a problem that shouldn’t exist in the first place.

 

 

  

Moderation? Not this time!

 “Today is only one day in all the days that will ever be. But what will happen in all the other days that ever come can depend on what you do today.”[i] Hemmingway had a way with words. What can we do today to save our democracy for all the other days?  

In its 250 years, the nation has worked through several periods of soul searching and searching for the soul. Lincoln spoke of the search for the better angels of our nature.[ii] It is surely time to do it again. Things just aren’t right, and the different seems wrong. It’s not just nostalgia rearing its head, but it is hard to imagine that the grandkids and the greats will refer to these as the good old days.

I work hard to whittle a moderate self when it comes to body politic; "On the rightward edge of the leftward tendency,”[iii] admittedly. I take pains to leave readers wondering if I am liberal or conservative, agree or disagree, to think about the issue themselves. Some take pains to tell me to tell them while others are pained by what they consider the obvious. As a member of Congress, neither side of the aisle would pay me heed. Solons on the right would consider me part of the enemy camp; too liberal. Liberals would consider me too conservative. Alas, moderates are the Rodney Dangerfields of politics, not extreme enough.

The extremes rule the day. They get upset if you call them extreme, but they don’t like you if you’re not. Until a few years ago primary candidates lured their base with extreme ideas. Once elected they governed from the middle. Now it seems they want to lead from the edges. I’m not sure that moderation, for all its virtues, will cure what ails us.

Shall we take off the gloves and bare-knuckle what needs to be said? It can’t be done with genteelness. Somehow we have to come out fighting for what is right, to say what needs to be said, what so many seem afraid to say, lest they be primaried, or say a wrong thing that will go viral on X or Instagram in twenty seconds.

The Greeks taught us that character is destiny.[iv] Dr. King told us that he looked forward to a time when people would be judged by the content of their character.[v] Meacham suggests that “What counts is not just the character of the individual at the top, but the character of the country.”[vi] Too many state and national leaders need an injection of character and too many of our fellow citizens support a past and potential leader lacking content of character. We are beyond the point where we can simply argue about the best process for building infrastructure, improving educational attainment, the border, or other policies of a general nature. We need to discuss the character of those who want to lead us.

We are a democracy. It distinguishes us from so many other countries of the world. We are a republic with a constitution that creates a democratic way of life. We are a people committed to the rule of law and to the institutions that bind us.

How should we react when a candidate for the presidency doesn’t support the rule of law, who says that in his first term, he never took an oath to support the Constitution or refused to cede the peaceful transfer of power at the end of his first term and encouraged followers to march on the Congress to stop the vote counting.  Is that the content of character we should expect of our leaders? My moderately held response is “hell no.”

Our tradition says that political opponents can disagree with each other, strongly at times, but always with civility and an understanding that it is the policies with which they disagree. They don’t hate their opponents. Hating your opponents is how autocrats behave.

How should we feel about a candidate who praises Viktor Orban, the PM of Hungary, because of his tough approach to turning that democracy into an autocracy? How should we feel about a candidate who praises Vladimir Putin, the President of Russia, who stomps on democracy and violates the established world order by invading a free and independent country, Ukraine, and annexing Crimea before moving inland? How should we feel about candidates who exchange “love” letters with the autocratic, nay dictator of North Korea, a person who had threatened to send missiles to the west coast of the U. S.? How should we feel about candidates who praise the Chinese government for their forceful takedown of democracy-seeking citizens in Tiananmen Square?

Former President Trump, at this juncture, is his party’s overwhelming favorite candidate for President. He has a full wind in his sails. He has said that when reelected he will find a way to fire huge numbers of civil servants and replace them with super loyal true believers in his way. This is against the law for one thing, and a first step to autocracy; ask the Germans. The civil service was implemented years ago as a defense against “To the victor go the spoils.” We should not go back. Yet, the Heritage Foundation’s Project 25 is screening thousands of candidates for federal jobs, using questionnaires that seek to determine the candidate’s loyalty to Trump and his policies more than skill-based questions.[vii] Their program includes over 20 videos used to train conservatives how to essentially take over agencies and reduce their effectiveness. 

The supposed Republican candidate has said that he will get even with all of the media who wrote articles against him, against his claim that he won the 2020 election, or who reported on his attempts to take over the Justice Department and to use the military to keep his power. He calls it retribution. One might presume that his aids haven’t read the First Amendment to the Constitution.[viii] Where is the content of character in these efforts?

The former President tried to use his constitutional right to claim voter fraud and bad management of the voting process in state after state and local governments. His lawyers filed over 60 appeals in the state courts alleging voter fraud and voting machines programmed by persons in other countries to favor his opponents, and they were rebuked in every case.

The former President’s staff set up slates of fake electors in several states to submit fake election results to Congress on January 6, 2020. Several of them are now working their cases through the court system. Some have admitted that they knew it was a fraudulent act. There are photos of national Republican campaign managers attending meetings where the fake electors signed the fake certificates. The former President is charged, and not yet tried, with over 90 felony counts related to threatening voting officials, lying about voting practices, encouraging the insurrection against the elected representatives in Congress, and other related issues. In addition, he has been found guilty of business fraud in the state of New York. Is this the content of character that the nation deserves for its leader? Think about the content of character.

The question before us has nothing to do with policy. Let’s discuss healthcare at another time. We can postpone discussions about border security, and we can feign concern about foreign nationals being terrorists in the homeland. We can muster patience about nearly everything but the overthrow of our democratic way of life.

Winston Churchill supposedly said, “You could always count on the Americans to do the right thing after they had exhausted all other possibilities.” We still have folks who believe the last election was stolen, and that the mob break-in at the capitol was a bunch of tourists trying to be patriotic, so maybe we haven’t exhausted all possibilities, but we are close.

David French, raised as a religious Fundamentalist suggests that many who favor Trump over anyone else have three characteristics in common: certainty, ferocity, and solidarity. It explains how so many religious people support the “Don.” They are certain he will save our country from the chokehold of liberalism. Some call him god-sent. Once certain of that, everyone else is the enemy that must be overthrown ferociously. They are convinced that they are in solidarity with other like-minded people.[ix]

So let’s face the reality of today’s America. Let us put the character of the nation to the test. Let us put country over party, Let us put democracy over loyalty to an individual. Let us call out candidates who lack content of character. We have searched for soul before, let us do it again.

I’ll start. Donald J. Trump has demonstrated time and time again, even to this day, that he does not possess the content of character that we expect of a president. He is not qualified to be president! Let us spread that word with clarity, ferocity, and solidarity. If we don’t, we stand a good chance of losing our democracy. It is time to call for our better angels!

What will happen in all the other days that ever come can depend on what you do today!

---

[i] Earnest Hemmingway – For Whom the Bell Tolls - 1940

[ii] Lincoln’s Inaugural Address

[iii] David Brooks “What Happened to American Conservatism?” The Atlantic December 8, 2021

[iv] Heraclitus lived in Ephesus between 535-475 BCE. He also told us that we could never step into the same river twice.

[v] Dr. Martin Luther King, January 20, 2013 – I Have a Dream speech, Washington DC

[vi] Jon Meacham, The Soul of America, the battle for our better angels, 2018

[vii] Heritage.org – Project 25

[viii] First Amendment – Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

[ix] David French -  Why Fundamentalists Love Trump - New York Times, December 7, 2023 @ 10:25 AM

Fragility!

Our world is in turmoil right now. Our nation is in turmoil. Too many pundits ask the question we do not want to answer – Is the U.S. a failed state or just a fragile state?”

The Britannica describes a failed state as one that “is unable to perform two fundamental functions of a sovereign nation-state – “it cannot project authority over its territory and peoples, and it cannot protect its national boundaries. …Its citizens no longer believe that their government is legitimate, and the state becomes illegitimate in the eyes of the international community” So, are we a fragile state or a failed state? I do not think we are a failed state, but we must pay attention to how we move forward in the next few years. Democracy is fragile.

We know that we are a divided nation. A PEW study found that 47% of Americans believe the nation needs major changes and 67% believe their politicians are corrupt.[i] They disagree about how to reconcile the dilemma.

Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger warned us that “We cannot afford a divided nation in a world in which nuclear power is matched by the growth of artificial intelligence, which removes all obstacles to accuracy and distance.”[ii] He reminded the audience that in 1974 he had said that “Societies do not grow by victories of one faction over another, but by reconciliations.”

The Guadian reports that 68% of Americans perceive a serious threat to our democracy, but 40% said a strong national leader was more important than having a democracy.[iii] Think about that! Nearly half of those surveyed believe that a civil war is at least somewhat possible in the next ten years. Think about that! The poll takers concluded that there is “continuing alienation from and mistrust of American democratic society and its institutions.” The events of January 6, 2021, make the survey’s conclusion a gross understatement.

We see dysfunction surrounding us every day. The top of our judiciary sees no problem with offers of expensive free vacations from litigants before the court. Too many of the judiciary and the Senators who advise and consent see no problem with the court system reflecting political beliefs rather than blind justice.

Our national legislature strains to muster the votes to elect a Speaker because a small faction of ultra-right-wing zealots demands total loyalty to their uncompromising agenda at the expense of compromise and reconciliation.

A former president continues to lie to his base about the verified results of the last election, ending a term in which he tore down as many of our institutions that provided safety, security, and the trust of the world community. 

In Foreign Affairs, Robert Gates, former Secretary of Defense, suggested what we should agree on; the world turmoil caused by our acknowledged enemies – China, Russia, Iran, and other despotic countries.[iv] He points out that both China and Russia want to restore their countries to the massive kingdoms they once were and to make them economic juggernauts. After World War II the U.S. and most of Europe agreed that one country would not invade another. Russia broke that agreement when it invaded Ukraine. Success there could encourage it to invade NATO nations to the west and give China the opening it needs to retake Taiwan. Putin has referred to the shutdown of the Soviet Union as “The greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20^th century.”[v]

China is pouring trillions of dollars into its Belt and Road Initiative, a strategy that intends to link many countries in Asia and Africa to China. They are building roads, harbors, and other infrastructure for poorer countries. The purpose of this is to increase their hegemony over much of the world, culturally and economically.

At the state level legislatures continue to pass laws that decrease people’s ability to easily vote or have representation that represents them all in the name of decreasing voter fraud, of which there is hardly any, or ensuring that the majority party continues to rule the state by the use of excessive gerrymandering.

So, here we are, a divided and dysfunctional nation hell-bent on arguing about what we do not agree on and apparently unwilling to agree on what we agree on. Russia, China, and other countries are trying to take over the world and find it hard for a majority in Congress to elect a Speaker that will last more than a few weeks or months.

Have we forgotten how many autocrats came to office through election by the people? The Nazi Party won enough seats in the Reichstag that Hindenburg was forced to appoint its leader as Chancellor. We saw what Hitler did to the world. Mussolini was appointed Il Duce when his fascist right-wing party was dominant in Italy. We saw what he did to the world. Franco was able to overthrow the elected Second Republic of Spain with the help of Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy. He led power until 1975. All were autocrats who espoused an ultra-nationalism, superior races, loyalty to the leader, and a nation-first agenda. They all tried to destroy democratic governments and nations. Democracies have no place for autocrats.

Could the U.S. suffer the fate of so many countries back in the 1940s? It could if we do not stop those who are trying to destroy democracy right now. Too many dream of the old days which were not our best days unless you were white middle class. Too many fear losing the advantage they have had for so many years.

Our democracy is still an experiment. It is a simple attempt, the first of its kind, to let “We the People” govern a nation bolstered by a legal system that the people believe to be fair, a legislature that works for all the people. Lincoln, in his report to the Congress on December 1, 1862, called it “The world’s last best hope” St. Augustine pointed out that fear is caused by “the loss of what we love.” My fear is that we could lose our democracy if the current trend continues. If Alexander Pope was correct that “hope springs eternal,” we may yet save our fragile best hope. But how?

[i] PEW Research, March 2021

[ii] Al Smith Dinner – reported by The Pilot, Boston, October 25, 2023.

[iii] Martin Pengelly, Guardian, August 30, 2022 @ 2:00 A.M.

[iv] Robert Gates, The Dysfunctional Superpower, can a divided America deter China and Russia? – FOREIGN Affairs, September 29, 2023

[v] Reuters, December 12, 2021 @ 9:59 A.M.

Peeping Time!

October 12 is not Columbus Day or Indigenous Peoples Day. It is Peak Day, most years – a bit early this year.

It may be in my blood because I grew up there, or still bright in a darkening brain, or maybe it is true, but Colorado’s yellow aspens or California’s whatever is in the Trinity Alps, or the pastels of the South, just do not compare to the fall foliage of Vermont.

It takes a blend of a few oaks mixed in with the predominant red maple and beech to turn an entire state into an artist’s canvas. New Hampshire tries to meet the challenge but never does. It is New Hampshire after all. New York, at least upstate, is too influenced by the Midwest or something, Quebec sells a lot of maple syrup worldwide, but their reds are not the real ones, even though they border the real.

One has to have something with which to cling. Red maples are as good as anything. But there has to be something to the belief, the known grandeur, the photos that keep the leaf-peepers descending on the state in late September to mid-October. The veteran peepers know which gravel road to take for the best view and best photo or the best selfie. But the hordes of people make the quiet life of small-town New England rather chaotic during the four- or five-week leaf season. The busloads of tourists add to the clamor.

The Sleepy Hollow farm in Pomfret may be the most photographed site in the state. The curved dirt road, the railed fence, and the traditional architecture make it a favored attraction. The problem for the farm owner is that they lose their privacy for weeks on end. Folks from other states and countries do not seem to understand that a private home is not open to the public. Tourists must be shooed from the living room just as they take a picture of the furniture or whatnot.

 

The 940 people in the town of Pomfret have had it up to their ears. They have closed the road to Sleepy Hollow farm, except to neighbors, from September 23-October 15, in an effort to save the road, secure the privacy of the farm owners, and well, keep hundreds of cars from parking all over the place.

Every Vermonter has his or her favorite places to see the colors. I had several that I favored. Peacham is a hamlet in the Northeast Kingdom of the state. The 713 citizens enjoy the benefits of small-town life. They are a mix of locally born and transplants from around the world; those who can afford all the expensive homes.

 

I am partial to Bald Hill Pond which sits at the base of Bald Mountain in the Northeast Kingdom of Vermont. The colors are intense each year because of so many sugar maples in the area. They support a good-sized sap business in the spring which makes a lot of Vermont’s famous maple syrup. Do not get sucked into that stuff from New Hampshire or New York. Maybe the partiality results from having spent my summers in the area when I was a kid. I have hiked the hills and mountains, canoed the pond, fished the streams, and picked the blackberries. It was almost home.

Willoughby Lake in Westmore is one of the world’s beauty spots. Mt. Hoar and Mt. Pisgah have sheer walls of granite that descend hundreds of feet into the lake. Looking north, you can imagine being in a Nordic fiord. The contrast of the reds and yellows against the bright white of the sheer granite cliffs is breathtaking.

At this time of year, the entire state is ablaze with color because about 75% of the countryside is forested, the most of any state. It does not matter where you go in the state, there is brilliant color. The locals will tell you about their favorite road for the best peeping, and their favorite hillside for a colorful last picnic before the snow falls. There are few downsides to fall colors; maybe one can think of one.

Those colorful leaves fall from the tree toward the end of the season. They fall onto the once-green lawns and need to be raked into piles, and back in the day, burned. Some folks raked the leaves up against their house foundation for insulation once the snow fell. If you were a young raker, the piles of leaves make good forts for protection from the kids across the street in their leaf forts. Safe as we were, we never seemed to have anything to throw at the other guys. Leaf forts stopped being a great thing at about the age of eight.

Some say that that part of colonial America only has two seasons: the Fourth of July and Foliage Time. It is not true of course. There is Mud Season, Black-fly season, Snow most years, time for deer hunting, and partridge season. None have the attraction or beauty of Foliage time.

Sometimes nostalgia is at play.

Whose Schools Are They?

 Too many people think that they know best how to educate their children. They don’t!

“Parental rights” is the new code word[i] for the few extremists who want to ban books from school classrooms and libraries, who want to change the country’s story. Some do it in the name of democracy, and some do it in the name of religious teachings. Some do it because they have lost faith in America’s institutions.

Public schools especially are in near chaos in parts of the country. School administrators scramble to meet the demands of national organizations bent on changing what kids learn. The strategy seems to be, to this observer, to ban any book dealing with sex in any way. The focus on sex reduces the focus on banning books that deal with slavery, white supremacy, or non-Christian religion.  

In the U.S., schools are run by the states and local school districts. It is a long tradition that started back in the early days of the country. We all know about the one-room schoolhouse. When towns were smaller, small really, their teachers and school officers bought the textbooks that best suited their local area.

Small towns grew into bigger towns, bigger towns into cities which grew into large cities with suburbs and exurbs. At each stage, education got further away from the parents. Schools are the new football being tossed around by governors and mad mothers with no goalposts in sight. Schools that teach some semblance of accurate history are labeled “woke,” which few can define.

My stab at it - woke is anything with which one doesn’t agree, or something about our past that might not be uplifting, no matter the truth. Those jumping into the woke fire grew up when history courses in schools were dumbed down – Washington chopped down a cherry tree and admitted it: nothing but legend. Most grade school and high school students did not learn that the “father of our country” owned nearly five hundred slaves who worked his plantation. After he died, they were sold to his widow’s brother. Schoolchildren did not learn that twelve of our early presidents owned slaves. John Adams and John Quincy Adams were the exceptions. In Florida, the governor wants schools to teach the good as well as the bad about slavery. There is nothing good about slavery! That is woke!

A recent Gallup poll,[ii] which they have conducted for over twenty years, shows that only 36% of adults are satisfied with the country’s schools. Yet, when parents of K-12 students were asked about the quality of their oldest child’s K-12 education, 76% said they were satisfied. Axios reported that parents talk to teachers and vote for school board members and are closer to the schools than the general public. 

Much of the disparity between the general public and the parents lies at the foot of agenda-driven media. If one listens only to one “news” source, one gets only one view of the world. In 2019, Republicans and Democrats essentially agreed about their satisfaction with public schools. This year, only 25% of Republicans are satisfied with public schools. The “awfulness of the schools” has been a fairly constant refrain on right-wing television in recent years.

Moms for Liberty identifies itself as “an organization dedicated to fighting for the survival of America by unifying, educating, and empowering parents to defend their parental rights at all levels of government.”[iii] To say that they are growing nationwide is an understatement. They have chapters in almost every state. The local chapters are supported by the national organization which supplies training and materials.

What could possibly be wrong with trying to save parental rights to save our country? Nothing, unless most of their activities are just the opposite of what the country stands for. They put great effort into banning books in schools and harassing school boards, all in the name of democracy.

Book banning is about as un-American as you can get, all by itself. Moms for Liberty, however, aim their efforts at banning books that deal with racism, white supremacy, any LGBTQ+ issues, sex in general, novels that might make white kids feel uncomfortable, or that do not promote the history of our country as they learned it. What they do is the opposite of democracy.

Much of the literature that they try to ban has been in the canon for years: books like To Kill a Mockingbird, Push, Sold, and The Beloved. The authors are Pulitzer Prize winners, National Book Award recipients, and Nobel Laureates.

Some state laws, such as in Florida, hold school administrators and teachers personally liable if they allow “wrong” books in their libraries and classrooms. As a consequence, educators are culling out any book that might involve sex or racism subjects, no matter how minor for fear of arrest. Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet is a favorite target.

The world has seen, but perhaps forgotten, the results of past efforts to ensure that the “right” books are in libraries, public or private. Nazi Germany is a good example of what happens when extremists decide to be the arbiters of decency and judges of good literature. Some say we should just teach the kids to read; but how? The science of teaching reading is settled. Students learn by reading. The more they read the better they read. The more topics they consider the better they can read other topics. The better they can read the better they can function as responsible citizens. Book banners should be required to read any book they want to ban and tell us what is objectionable about it.

This is how it should work. Citizens go to the polls and elect school boards. School boards hire professional educators who teach and administer. Unhappy voters can vote for different people in the next election. Full stop. 

 It bears repeating that the democratic experiment relies almost wholly on the respect and trust of its institutions. If a small group of people in each town or county can scare elected officials into genuflecting to the demands of their extremist viewpoints, such as our schools and libraries, it is another notch in the demise of a venture in self-governance. If a small group of zealots can get local and regional officials to ban books, what comes next, banning certain religions, banning unions, banning newspapers with which they disagree, banning radio and TV stations they don't like, or ...? 

---

[i] Barbara Smith, Placer County is plagued by Evangelical extremists, September 2, 2023

[ii] Gallup Poll, August 31, 2023

[iii] Moms for Liberty website, 2023

Read it!

It is riveting, to say the least about it. It is the most shocking document about the actions of a U.S. president ever written. It cannot be discounted as political hype. It has to be read, all forty-five pages of it. It is a tale told in detail about how our country nearly lost its democratic chops. Read it!

The story, our story, begins with stark simplicity …

 “The Defendant, DONALD J. TRUMP, was the forty-fifth President of the United States and a candidate for re-election in 2020. The Defendant lost the 2020 presidential election.”

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts, not even “alternative facts.” A federal grand jury alleges that Donald J. Trump attempted to overthrow the peaceful transfer of power on January 6, 2021. They brought four charges against the former president:

1.   DONALD J. TRUMP, did knowingly combine, conspire, confederate, and agree with co-conspirators, known and unknown to the Grand Jury, to defraud the United States by using dishonesty, fraud, and deceit to impair, obstruct, and defeat the lawful federal government function by which the results of the presidential election are collected, counted, and certified by the federal government.

2.   DONALD J. TRUMP, did knowingly combine, conspire, confederate, and agree with co-conspirators, known and unknown to the Grand Jury, to corruptly obstruct and impede an official proceeding, that is, the certification of the electoral vote, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1512(c)(2).

3.   DONALD J. TRUMP, attempted to, and did, corruptly obstruct, and impede an official proceeding, that is, the certification of the electoral vote. (In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1512(c)(2),

4.   DONALD J. TRUMP, did knowingly combine, conspire, confederate, and agree with co-conspirators, known and unknown to the Grand Jury, to injure, oppress, threaten, and intimidate one or more persons in the free exercise and enjoyment of a right and privilege secured to them by the Constitution and laws of the United States—that is, the right to vote, and to have one's vote counted.

For those of us who do not spend a lot of our free time reading court documents, this is an easy one to read. Although there are unindicted co-conspirators, the charges rest solely on former President Trump. Obviously, he pled not guilty.

Many dispute the charges, based on desire, opinion, or hope, but not the facts. The voting process was disputed in 60-plus cases across the country and found wanting. Those responsible for bringing false claims are unnamed co-conspirators.

The trial that ensues from the formal accusation will be one of the most important in our nation’s history. It will be fought with every legal nuance available to either side of the argument, as it should be. In the end, it is the job of the prosecutor to prove that Trump did what is alleged. Until a jury finds he is guilty of any of the four felonies, he is presumed innocent.

One segment of the indictment states clearly that the former president’s statements about a lost election are protected by his First Amendment rights, and the charges do not challenge that right. He is charged for what he did, not what he said, or how he said it.

Why should we average Americans get worked up over these allegations? Do they really have an effect on our lives? Of course, they do if we like the idea of a democratic government and our ability to elect our own leaders.

Two weeks after the Department of Justice indicted the former president on four serious counts, he was indicted again by a Grand Jury in Fulton County, Georgia for violation of Georgia’s RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization) law. The Georgia RICO law is much stronger than the Federal act. In addition, the Grand Jury named eighteen co-conspirators with similar charges. Should we get worked up over these allegations too? Well, yes. Again, as always, the person charged is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

 

The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll, conducted in June 2023, found that only one in ten U.S. adults give high ratings to the way democracy is working. Forty-nine percent of Americans do not think that democracy is working. If half of its citizens do not think the political system is working, can it be far from a failed state?

In a June 2023 article in The Atlantic, Peter Turchin discussed his extensive research on failing states. He and his staff looked at the history of hundreds of states during the last one thousand years and evaluated them on several criteria. His article, America is Heading Toward Collapse, identifies two categories shared by most failed nations: “The first is popular immiseration—when the economic fortunes of broad swaths of a population decline. The second, and more significant, is elite overproduction—when a society produces too many superrich and ultra-educated people, and not enough elite positions to satisfy their ambitions.”

That describes the current situation in the U.S., doesn’t it? Wealth has moved to the few oligarchs while the middle and lower wage earners still struggle with inflation and stagnation of wages in the last two decades and a lack of conspicuous consumption funds. All along we hear the clamor from the non-urban areas about unfamiliar and unwanted cultural change by the educated elite.

And then there is the Congress and the state legislatures, whose members are all fighting for the support of the primary voters and ignoring the wishes of their contingent of moderates and independents. In state after state, legislators are passing laws related to abortion, gun safety, and gender identity that most of their constituents do not support; all the time, they seemingly ignore inflation, wages, healthcare, climate change, and other kitchen-table issues.

In a nation divided, a new CBS News/YouGov poll found that 53% of likely GOP primary voters considered Trump a source of truth compared to 42% for religious leaders.

If one reads the indictments against the former president, nearly 40 pages outline the actions that led to Count 1. The story is almost hour by hour over a period of months, with supporting documentation. It will be hard for any lawyer to argue successfully for a “not guilty” verdict. The evidence, if true and provable, tells the story in detail of a deliberate effort by a cabal of associates trying to change the outcome of the 2020 election.

But polls show that about half the country believes Trump and not the evidence. That is a serious situation but more serious is the fact that about half the country does not consider the charges serious enough to not vote for him.

Too much evidence, for me at least, points to vital institutions losing the respect of the nation. When Congress is considered a failure, the courts are not trusted, attempts to overthrow the peaceful transfer of power are ignored or considered peaceful demonstrations, wealth moves to the few and capitalism is questionable as an effective economic system, one must consider the possibility of a failed state. The last time that happened we endured a Civil War.

We can do better.

What are the first three things you would do, if you were in a position to do them, to save our democracy?