My writings - and those of others.
Against Tyranny
Robert Reich joins with Timothy Snyder in expressing resistance to American tyranny today on Substack. Canadians who know the US and who may have lived there as students or employees share the concern and try to learn how to deal with the impact on themselves. Threatening the media is not on for a government. It is, in fact what the first amendment states – rather than the right to say anything that one likes. The role of government is not to prohibit freedom of expression, but to affirm it.
We Canadians are anxious and annoyed but not frightened. When the American ambassador wishes that he didn’t have to associate with “nasty” Canadians, we see that as his problem, not ours. Here are Reich’s recommendations that can apply to us as we deal with our own issues in a different kind of war.
· It doesn’t work to try to appease an authoritarian. We need to watch our own national and provincial government in this respect.
· Individuals can’t protest alone, though some inspire us. We need to join and support groups to do so.
· Confronting authoritarians requires courage. We have to speak out when we disagree with others. At the same time we must be respectful that others have the right to different views. There is a difference there. It doesn’t mean attacking them.
· It doesn’t stop. While we are tired of the ongoing TV reality show, we have to keep track of the daily changes in activity.
· Small actions are necessary. Writing to our elected representatives is important. Positive letters of support when appropriate are helpful to counteract the ongoing negative and hateful ones. Kindness works.
· Be happy with reliable results because tyrants rely on people to give up.
· Stay active and involved. Speak up, join with others in appropriate actions, talk to elected representatives, support companies that do the right things and protect the most vulnerable among us.
And this is how Reich concludes today. His latest book details many aspects of long lives that we share. He talks about the courage of his past generations, and I’ve lived about 16 years longer, so my own memories as a child during the Second World War are greater. But the message is the same.
“It is up to us to preserve democracy and protect social justice. Our predecessors in this struggle — generations who have sacrificed for these values — demand it. Our children and grandchildren deserve it.”
Forget S.T.E.M - Remember Poets
When two of my favourite writers and thinkers spend Labour Day quoting poets, there is a message beyond my being glad that I studied English Language and Literature so many years ago – as a labour of love.
On the Brink
What’s a brink? Oxford dictionary says “an extreme edge of land before a steep or vertical slope.”
What’s a dictator? Britannica has this to say:
“dictator, in modern political systems, a single person who possesses absolute political power within a country or territory or a member of a small group that exercises such power. . . . Modern dictators, however, resemble ancient tyrants rather than ancient dictators. . . . .Dictators usually resort to force or fraud to gain despotic political power, which they maintain through the use of intimidation, terror, and the suppression of basic civil liberties. They may also employ techniques of mass propaganda in order to sustain their public support.”
Is it time to step back - or step up?
Andrew Coyne of the Globe and Mail, Canada’s national newspaper does the latter with evidence. You need to read the full article bur here are some of the items he cites of the current US. president:
Installing National Guard forces - some armed- in Los Angeles and the capital city, with plans to do so elsewhere saying they are needed to fight crime.
Seizing suspects and sending them to foreign and domestic prisons without trial or charges.
Investigating the lawyers who proseuted him, and additionally officials who worked for him and disagreed with him.
Pardoning January 6 rioters.
Threatening and suspending TV licenses and demanding massive settlements.
Doing the same with universities and law firms.
Asking for redrawing of electoral maps.
Firing key leaders who provide information; The Bureau of Statistics, the Defense Intelligence Agency, health officials.
Defying court orders.
Spending money appropriated by congress.
Placing giant portraits of himself in public places.
Adding gold decor to the White House and having a military parade as a birthday celebration.
Can one depend on the courts and the congress? Both have political majorities. What about midterm elections? How long is it before the fall of 2026 and what can happen between now and then?
Is it good to stand on the brink? I remember doing so on the cliffs of Dover many years ago. The view - with its own history was breathtaking - but one immediately became aware of being too close to the edge. We left and went on to do other important things in our lives - not just stepping back.
What are the important things now? As Canadians we watch - but we must not underestimate our responsibility for ourselves.
Support our American friends who will protest this Labor Day in any way we can.
Refuse to bow to propaganda that stretches into our own country through mainstream and social media.
Refuse a trade agreement that has no benefits for us - no matter how long negotiation takes or intermediary pain.
Laugh at and leave onlne influencers who don’t know what they are talking about.
Read historians and others who provide evidence and include context in their views.
Support our city councillors, members of provincial and federal parliaments by telling them when they do good things; call them to account when they don’t.
Be kind to others and do small and large things that are beneficial to everybody.
Step up, step up, step up - don’t step back.
News Coverage
I’ve found myself spending more time on Substack with a group of writers and media people who have self-identified as “The News Community” – several former writers for mainstream media including Paul Krugman, Jennifer Rubin, Joyce Vance, Heather Cox Richardson Jim Acosta, Rachel Maddow, Kara Swisher and Timothy Snyder. They point out the folly of the New York Times and even PBS who have to cover both sides with an “on the other hand” dual perspective. Apparently, this view is even getting to the Times itself that has asked readers what they think of their coverage in a special article today in response. I’m taking a look.
· They are managing the “flood the zone” chaos with hiring more reporters and editors with an attempt to back up occasionally to summarize “how Mr. Trump was acting free of so many of the constraints that had kept him from pursuing his agenda and instincts during his first term.” My own take is that they need to step up every time rather than stepping back.
· They claim that their journalists will not be intimidated. Paul Krugman said in his last post that he felt that he was.
· “The main lesson is to try to separate what some would call “The Trump Show” — his ability to command attention, often by making norm-breaking or outrageous statements — from the concrete policy decisions and substantive changes in the direction of the country.” What really bothers me is the number of images of the president which get as much attention as the other issues above. It is to the credit of my other morning news read, The Globe and Mail is that the have stopped showing his image above any article – lessening the inevitable omni-presence.
· When asked about choices and scrutiny of their stories, the rightly cite many sources but zero in on the reporter who says, “I’ve found a great story.” So today the remarkable stories are of course a three-hour praise laden meeting of the cabinet and on a parallel line in the online version the announcement of an engagement. It is so typical of us all – multitasking celebrity worship and world changing issues.
· They go a bit weak when asked about words like propaganda and lies. It is rather nuanced to claim long term “tenuous relationship with facts.” The president is being let off the hook by saying that perhaps he actually believes some things are true when actually they are not. The word to use for this might be “delusional” and questioning whether a delusional person should be in the role that he is in. There are, in fact, constitutional ways to deal with such a problem, and an additional role may be to educate members of government who appear to be avoiding its existence.
· They rightly suggest that data from any source should be verified by a number of others.
· They are keeping track of moves with a scorecard – an average of eleven per day. Their visual graphics are admirable. Part of the difficulty is the one hundred items a day that appear and disappear. As a news addict. I like others. Are always looking for the next big thing.
· Sourcing the news through official press briefings is seen by readers as problematic. The response is that they are there but use other sources. They note that the previous president gave view interviews, while this one is more open to them. Fact checking is necessary of course – but what it means is they are extending the in-your-face podium of daily nonsense.
· They do allow a range of opinions and guest editors and vet them well. These are among the most interesting reads for me.
· Immigration information coming at them is full of false leads and starts. I don’t envy the paper in this regard. But to an observer from outside their country the amount of coverage about its effect on the economy rather than the assault on human dignity is concerning.
· Their coverage of climate change is questioned. The answer is not one that I find totally reassuring. The response is that they are talking to scientists and academia rather than current government “experts.” Following the money isn’t mentioned.
· And as of today with special interest for Canadians is TARIFFS. They praise a neat little three slide graphic which I find hard to understand because it goes too fast. Then they move on to tell us that car parts come from different countries. Hello? We Canadians know that has been happening for several years. Is this news to most Americans? They go on to say that they are providing lots of articles.
· Readers would like to see less of Trunp on the home page. They would be happier in Canada where this happens less frequently. I agree with the editors that this presidency is the main story. But at least we don’t have to have shopping and recipes compete at the same level. Sometimes it is nice to live where we do, not because of more elbows up, but because of more sanity.
· To be fair, they do seem to be talking to a variety of Americans with different points of view.
· Readers are concerned about threats to reporters. Timothy Snyder notes that investigative reporters are the real heroes and we are mourning those who have provided the real story in Gaza at the cost of their lives. The response reminds us of the dangers to them even in the land of the free where they have to create a home for the brave.
· Paying for news is another concern of the readers that Timothy Snyder shares in On Freedom. The Times confirms that there are costs but share as widely as they can through summaries.
· They get called from their readers on “President” or “Mr. Their answer is a good one and applies to our own leaders as well – official at the first mention, but not necessary subsequently, as has been an historical pattern.
Confabulation
I had to look it up. I could see some roots in “con” and “fabl” looked like something made up. Google AI and Wikipedia are somewhat different. The first sounds authoritative while the second is, as usual, more nuanced. Both note an association with belief in false memories as a sign of dementia, much confidence that mistaken beliefs are true. It sounds a bit like letting someone off the hook.
A retirement home administrator once talked about current residents dividng them into the young-old and the old-old. As someone closer to her old-old all the time, I don’t like age and dementia as synonyms. But one former American president that we Canadians live next to, had difficulties that I tended to dismiss until I could see them for myself by tuning in to the last five minutes of a presidential debate. Age was not the problem.
I’m therefore concerned that so much of the press is ignoring what is right in front of them. We Canadians are coming to terms with trying to deal with such a person - who insists that we are sending enormous amounts of fentanyl to his country and must be punished. Other candidates for punishment are in the news every day – including his own supporters. It was therefore instructive to read a post this morning by Chris Truax in The Hill about a certain person’s mental decline and asking, “What Now?” as well as adding an unfamiliar word to my vocabulary.
This author believes that confabulation arrived on July 15 with the certain person’s memories of an uncle who had conversations with a serial killer. (We Canadians might put the date much earlier in terms of the fentanyl accusation, but few Americans seemed to worry about that.) The certain person goes on to talk about drug prices apparently being reduced by 1,000 percent and Truax notes that mathematical miscalculations are another symptom. Barack Obama and James Comey didn’t make up the Epstein files. Who appointed Jerome Powell? We know. It also says something about Canadians that a person like me knows all about these stories even from our own daily press. They are not a mystery
Now the US economic numbers are wrong. Blaming Canada gets a pass this yime. Instead, a certain person fires the Commissioner of Labor Statistics. He thinks the head of the Federal Reserve must go so that American can keep “doing GREAT.”
There was another article in the Australian publication, Aeon Weekly, which should give us all pause. It is entitled “How to Run the World” and written by David van Reybrouck, Philosopher Laureate for the Netherlands and Flanders. His main argument is the need for new forms of international diplomacy and is well worth reading. A couple of points struck me in relation to the news of the morning and there are some good aphorisms: “Diplomacy is distrust clad in good manners;” Worlds Fairs in the early twentieth century were “multilateralism for the millions: competitive entertainment where European countries came together to challenge each other.” Multilateralism continued with the creation of international institutions that somehow worked for a long time.
But a new threat has emerged. Climate change. The first bodies to deal with it followed the institutional model of international panels like the International Panel on Climate Change, with the COP conferences of 198 countries. The signings at these conferences, the author states, are the result of four centuries of diplomatic history. We agreed to “transition away from fossil fuels” at COP 29 in December of 2023. We forgot that science had known and warned about the dangers of fossil fuels for thirty years before this. The president of the largest country in the world thinks climate change a hoax. (Confabulation?) Another maxim from the author: “We are unprepared for the storms ahead and unwilling to redesign the vessel.” Nature, he notes, has no national boundaries. We are only beginning to wake up to that reality.
Van Reybrouck goes one to propose elements of innovative design that deserve another post. A commentator on our national television noted last night that after a recent US visit, he sees in Americans a growing understanding of why we Canadians are so upset.
We Canadians can wait for better tariff arrangements, we can buy local products, and we can enjoy vacations in our own country, but it is the responsibility of Americans to do something about a certain person. Protests are good. Holding elected representatives to account for their actions or lack of them is even better.