Sunday, July 7, 2024

Joe Biden Is Confused

It isn’t just Joe Biden. Clearly, our president continued to misrepresent his record while talking with George Stephanopolis Friday night. 

Nothing strange about that. Politicians are in the business of distortion, what Eli Lake called alternative facts.


The media has a problem. It has been lying about Joe Biden’s mental acuity for lo these many years. Now, it has been caught in a lie and it is hard at work covering up.


And yet, as we saw yesterday in the Olivia Nuzzi New York Magazine article, the belated exposure of Biden’s cognitive impairment is accompanied by an assertion that he was a great president. And of course, that Donald Trump would be a complete and utter calamity. 


For his detractors Trump is nothing other than the Antichrist, the Biblical beast that embodies all evils an that must be destroyed in order to allow the Heavenly City to descend on the earth. I expounded at some length on this last Thursday.


So, Eli Lake offered the right commentary after the Biden- Stephanopoulos interview. For example, Biden claimed that he had put together a plan for Middle East peace. Lake called it “wishcasting.”


Meanwhile, the substance of Biden’s interview offered what would charitably be called wishcasting. For example, the president said, “I also was the guy who put together a peace plan for the Middle East that may be coming to fruition.”


Of course, this is wish fulfillment. When Trump was in charge, he put together the Abraham Accords, a plan for Middle East peace. And, when Trump was in charge, there was no October 7 or war in Gaza. 


Lake exposes the subterfuge:


But there is no actual peace plan for the Middle East. There has been diplomacy between Biden’s envoys and Israeli and Saudi leaders, but the proposal does not address the war in Gaza or calm the escalating crisis between Hezbollah and the Jewish state. It is rather an ambitious deal that would offer a peace process for the Palestinians and a path to diplomatic relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia. The Iranian-backed proxies who are belligerents in the current war have not been part of that diplomacy. 


Iranian backed proxies have been shooting at American troops in the Middle East. Iranian backed proxies have shut down shipping in the Red Sea. The Biden administration refused to apply sanctions to Iranian petroleum exports, thus aiding and abetting and funding terrorism. 


Precisely why this is a record of achievement escapes me.


And then there is China. Its government is doing what it wants to do, undeterred by the Biden administration. Lake explains:


On China, Biden’s claims were even more baffling. As he boasted about his record, he said, “Who’s gonna be able to be in a position where I’m able to keep the Pacific Basin in a position where we’re—we’re at least checkmating China now?” 


But China is hardly checkmated. Though Biden has strengthened U.S. alliances with some of China’s neighbors, China has managed to find its way out of its Covid-induced economic slump and has fully aligned with Russia in its war against Ukraine while it continues to menace Taiwan.


One recalls the beginning of the Ukraine war when the Biden administration asked China  to intervene with its ally Russia and to recommend that Putin not invade. And one recalls that the Chinese government asked the Biden people for access to their intelligence.


Biden handed it over, and the Chinese passed it along to Russia. Obviously, China made no effort to stop Putin from invading Ukraine.


The Ukraine war was not a foreign policy triumph. As you know, Biden has bragged about how he organized the nations of NATO to support the Ukrainian side, but would it not have been better if there had been no war to begin with. Surely, it represents a waste of human life and human resources.


So, the Trump conduct of foreign affairs did not produce a war in Ukraine. The Biden conduct did. Naturally, Biden’s supporters are up in arms about the horrors that the Trump presidency will unleash on the world.


Dare we say that, Biden has no real sense of objective reality. Consider this exchange with Stephanopoulos: 


Biden also said he continues to draw enthusiastic crowds as he did in a campaign event on Friday. “How many people draw crowds like I did today? You find me more enthusiastic than today?” he said. 


That answer was even too much for Stephanopoulos. “I don’t think you wanna play the crowd game,” he responded. “Donald Trump can draw big crowds. There’s no question about that.” 


Aside from the gross inaccuracy of the claim, the truth of the matter is, as Stephanopoulos pointed out, the one who draws the biggest crowds is Trump.


Does this suggest that Biden does not know who he is? Does it mean that he has mistaken himself for Trump and wants to take credit for Trump’s achievements? Strangely, his supporters cheer from the peanut gallery. They are so lathered up over Trump that they attribute Trump’s successes to Biden. They have completely lost their minds.


Please subscribe to my Substack, for free or preferably for a fee.

Saturday, July 6, 2024

Saturday Miscellany

First, say it ain’t so, Joe.

The decline and fall of Joe Biden is consuming the media. As of this moment, we do not know whether or not Biden will remain in the race or whether we will be offered cackling Kamala as a replacement.


How did it happen so quickly? Peggy Noonan offers an explanation in the Wall Street Journal:


The post-debate polls show he [Biden] is losing support both overall and in the battlegrounds. A cratering like that doesn’t happen because you had a bad night, or a cold, or were tired. It happens when an event starkly and unavoidably shows people what they already suspected. It happens when the event gives them proof.


In fairness, everyone suspected as much. And yet, with the connivance of the media and of Democratic politicians, a great gaslighting was imposed on the American people.


Now, Biden’s remaining supporters want to see more of him, want to see him do town hall meetings and live interviews.


And yet, Noonan points out, if Biden could do so he would have done so already:


Those who support the president offer suggestions on conference calls. “Just get him out there—long, live interviews, lots of news conferences, a big rally in the round with Q&A from the voters.”


They don’t know what they’re talking about. He can’t do what they want him to do. He can’t execute it. He tried to do it last week—the debate was, in effect, a live, high-stakes interview. He won’t be able to do it next week or next month either. Old age involves plateaus and plummets. It gets worse, not better.


The elected officeholders of the Democratic Party should take responsibility and press the president to leave. You can’t scream, “Democracy is on the line,” and put up a neurologically compromised candidate to fight for it. They haven’t moved for two reasons. One has to do with their own prospects: You don’t want to be the one who kills the king, you want to be the one who warmly mourns the king and takes his mantle after someone else kills him. The other is fear of who would replace him on the ticket, and how exactly that would happen.


Second, one Tyler Austin Harper offers this explanation for the shock that is befalling younger Americans.


Maybe the Biden situation is only possible in a society with heavy generational siloing, where people don’t interact with other age cohorts except at Thanksgiving. Nobody who interacts with 80 year olds regularly could honestly think an 81 year old man should run the country.


Dare I say, for those of us who are on the elderly side, this is not good news.


Third, and then there was Biden doing a radio interview on Thursday. Therein he said this:


By the way, I'm proud to be, as I said, the first vice president, first black woman... to serve with a black president. Proud to be involved of the first black woman on the Supreme Court. There's so much that we can do because, look... we're the United States of America.' 


Does Biden think it will help his cause when he claims to be a black woman?


Fourth, there is Olivia Nuzzi’s report about Biden in New York Magazine. If she had not held the story back, we would have been talking about her and not Annie Linskey-- whose Wall Street Journal expose of the Biden mental state we have covered in these pages.


One is amused by Nuzzi’s contention that a conspiracy of silence surrounded the truth about Joe Biden. She was a card-carrying member of that conspiracy. Duh.


Nuzzi explains that those who surround Biden have produced a conspiracy designed to keep the truth from the world.


She takes no prisoners:


The worry is not that Biden will say something overly candid, or say something he didn’t mean to say, but that he will communicate through his appearance that he is not really there.


Joe Biden’s mind is deteriorating, at a fairly rapid clip. One recalls that Michael Burry, of Big Short fame, made the same argument several years ago, and that he is a physician.


Nuzzi writes:


Longtime friends of the Biden family, who spoke to me on the condition of anonymity, were shocked to find that the president did not remember their names. For many inclined to support the president, this was good enough. They did not need to monitor the president’s public appearances, because under his leadership the country had returned to the kind of normal state in which members of a First World democratic society had the privilege to forget about the president for hours or days or even weeks at a time.


The sad part of this article is the fan girl aspect. Nuzzi thinks that under Biden everything is for the best in the best of all possible worlds. She ignores the wars raging in Ukraine and the Middle East-- or else she considers them to be normal. And she ignores the botched Afghanistan withdrawal and the open borders policy. 


Fifth, speaking of failure, the British conservative party, led by the hyperwealthy Rishi Sunak, was destroyed in Thursday’s parliamentary elections.


Conservatives had been in charge for more than a decade. Apparently, they did not do a very good job.


Since the media world has been lit up with claims that the Labour victory was a victory for the British left, it is worth adding a remark made by David Goldman on Twitter:


The UK election was a shift to the right, not the left: Nigel Farage's Reform's 13% knee-capped the Tories and allowed Labour a record number of seats by plurality with just 33.8% of the vote (compared to 40% in the 2017 election which it lost). The UK thus is in line with Germany and France.


Sixth, the second round of French parliamentary elections will take place this weekend. As I dutifully noted in these pages, the parties of the left have tried to consolidate their power, the better to ensure that the right wing party of Marine Le Pen does not prevail.


As you know, the French do not have Donald Trump to kick around, and to accuse of being Hitler. So, they take the next best thing, the Le Pen party, whose past was contaminated with Nazi sympathies, and become completely hysterical about the return of Hitler.


As it happens, the party of Marine Le Pen has not only worked to rid itself of the radical right, but it has staunchly supported Israel.


The anti-Le Pen group contains the socialist leader, Jean Luc Melanchon, who supports Hamas and the Palestinian cause.


Seventh, a recent article by Tara Isabella Burton allows me to get back in touch with my inner pedant. Burton offered some reflections on literary pilgrimages for The Hedgehog Review. As you know, the most famous work of pilgrimage literature was Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales, written in the fourteenth century.


As it happens, Burton makes two significant omissions. First, and most obviously, she does not make note of the ultimate in fourteenth century pilgrimage smut, the Decameron of Boccaccio. It does not contain a surfeit of pieties, but it is certainly fun to read.


And then there is the thirteenth century book by one Bonaventure, called, Itinerarium Mentis in Deum-- which means, The Soul’s Journey unto God.


The Bonaventure guidebook launched a series of books about spiritual journeys-- not quite the same as a pilgrimage, but close enough. Dare we suggest that this book was one of the first books of psychotherapy.


Finally, I signal that I have some free consultation hours for my life coaching practice. Those who would like to know more about life coaching are directed to examine my case fictions, published here on the last three Fridays. If you are interested, email me at StuartSchneiderman@gmail.com.


Please subscribe to my Substack, for free or preferably for a fee.


Friday, July 5, 2024

Life Coaching-- a Case Study, Part 1

At his first session with Claude Chauncey announced that he had already completed a four year psychoanalysis. By his account the treatment had been a rousing success. 

Chauncey had chosen a young analyst at the clinic conducted by the Gramercy Institute. He paid a very low fee and worked with Stella, a young trainee who was supervised by a more senior analyst. 


A recent college graduate Chauncey felt an affinity with Stella, who was only a few years his senior. In exchange for his reduced fee Chauncey had agreed that Stella could present his treatment as a control case to fulfill the requirements for her own graduation.


When treatment ended Stella’s training committee had concurred that she had conducted a highly successful, almost textbook case. 


And yet, eighteen months after receiving what he considered a clean bill of mental health Chauncey was mired in deepening anguish, as though his world was in ruins. 


It was not for nothing that Freud never claimed that psychoanalysis was an effective therapy.


When he first consulted Claude, Chauncey insisted on presenting the story of his life. Ignoring Claude’s convivial handshake and matter-of-fact niceties, he launched into his personal history, in great detail, accompanied by a smattering of analytic insights.


Allowing Chauncey to indulge this deformity, which told him more than he needed or wanted to know, Claude registered that the young man’s positive self-image, or what was left of it, depended heavily on his belief that he had mastered the analytic process. Not only that, but Chauncey had become a true believer, a cult follower for psychoanalysis.


Product of an unhappy, though stable marriage between an anglophile lawyer-- who had insisted on giving his son an archaic British name-- and a mother who had maintained a career as a real estate agent-- she had told her son that work was the most satisfying part of her life-- Chauncey was the younger of two children.


He had a sister, Yvette, six years his senior. The family had settled in the sylvan verdure of the New York suburbs. The family’s living standards had bounded forward when his father had parlayed his limited legal skills into a thriving divorce practice. Chauncey went to public high school and then to Yale.


Yale was his father’s dream come true. The older man had contributed generously to the Sterling Library Fund and believed that this had helped gain his son admission. He wanted Chauncey to become a lawyer and to join his practice. Whenever Chauncey expressed reservations about becoming a junior clone, his father exclaimed that George Bush had not done so badly.


Claude could not fail to notice that the bedraggled young man facing him, with his long blond ponytail and unkempt beard, wearing an unpressed flannel shirt and baggy jeans, sitting sloppily in the consulting chair with a terrified gaze focused intently on him, resembled a farm boy from Iowa more than a scion of Westchester gentility. He took it as a bad sign. In some circumstances he might have mentioned the discordance, but given Chauncey’s evident fragility, he held his tongue. 


He chose to side with Chauncey against his father by saying that what worked for the Bush family was not necessarily a universal law of human nature. Chauncey was somewhat comforted. He proceeded with his story.


Working with Stella had confirmed his conviction that his father was the problem, and quite a problem it was. The family autocrat had hovered over him like a menacing angel. He had been quick to find fault and quicker to punish. He amused himself with quaint and biting witticisms: “In this house there are two ways; my way and the way out.”


Chauncey feared his father and spent much of his energy attempting to conform to his father’s will. Until he arrived at Yale things had gone according to plan-- according to his father’s plan, that is.


At Yale, Chauncey had joined a group of political activists protesting the school’s racism. Later he manifested wioth a caucus denouncing big corporations for their environmental pollution. In place of the preppy uniform that he had worn like a second skin, he adopted a freer dress code-- to the point where his father preferred that he not come home. 


Inevitably, Chauncey decided against law school. He chose to work at a store that sold wholesome food in an underprivileged neighborhood. Hearing this news his father became apoplectic and refused to help his son make ends meet. “You are not going to be a slug on my money,” were his words.


Chuncey took the news badly and fell into a depression. When he decided to do psychoanalysis, his father pronounced it to be so much brainwashing and refused to pay for treatment. Thus, Chauncey became a low-fee clinic patient.


Treatment had focused on the conflict between father and son, emphasizing the father’s need for control and the son’s need to rebel. 


But the treatment did not ignore Chauncey’s mother. In fact, she resented her husband’s treatment of her son-- not least because he behaved like a brute with her. Deadened by her marriage she had been going through the motions, constantly criticized for her son’s failings. Chauncey’s father blamed Yale for his son’s breakdown, but he also unleashed torrents of rage against his wife. For her part she took a secret satisfaction in her son’s rebelliousness.


At the same time, Chauncey’s father was slavishly devoted to his daughter. In her father’s eyes Yvette could do no wrong; he never pressured her to do anything. Being a girl she escaped family tradition and was not obliged to walk in her father’s footsteps. At present she was living in Omaha with her husband, an insurance executive and their two children.


After presenting the family portrait, Chauncey explained that Stella had thought that he was a pawn in an ongoing struggle between father and mother. By making him the kind of man her husband despised, Chauncey’s mother was exacting revenge for years of abuse.


Later, Chauncey disclosed that his mother had never really wanted to marry his father. The man had tricked her into having sex and had impregnated her. Being of a lower social class he proclaimed her to be a trophy of great value. She would not have called it rape but she knew that she had been victimized and that she would have to live with the consequences for the rest of her life. 


Claude was moved by this stirring rendition of Chauncey’s life. He saw two ancient Greek myths converging. On one side was young Oedipus, crippled and left to die by his father, surviving to murder his father and to marry a woman he would eventually learn was his mother. But Claude also heard echoes of the myth of Medea, the sorceress who aided her husband in capturing the golden fleece, only to turn into the scorned wife who destroyed herself and her children in revenge. 


However much he admired the narrative clarity of this psychoanalytically inspired rendition of his life, Claude hesitated to bless it with his unqualified approval. If this were the truth of Chauncey’s life, the unfortunate young man would have been trapped in a struggle to the death between two monstrous specimens of inhumanity. Aesthetically, it was satisfying to interpret human existence through the filter of Greek mythology, but it reduced people to caricatures  and burdened them with a fatalistic mood. Claude could see that none of it had provided Chauncey with emotional balance.


Perhaps Chauncey saw himself condemned to play a role in someone’s play. Were he to refuse the role, what alternatives did therapy have to offer? Should he become the author of his own tragedy? Eminent psychoanalysts had offered this solution. Claude found it to be vapid.


Psychoanalysts had always taken it as an article of faith that the past determines the present. Studying the past allows a patient to discover what he really, really wanted, and what other people really, really wanted from him. And yet, nothing was gained by learning who wanted what from whom. It might have provided a mask of intelligibility, but that did not change behavior.


The real challenge was to overcome bad habits. Understanding how and why you develop a bad habit has no real influence on the habit. So said Aristotle, and he was surely right. The problem is not how to understand dysfunctional behavior, but how to modify it.


Claude was digesting all of this material when Chancey launched into a multi-count indictment of his parents. He believed himself the product of parental treachery.


He began with a constellation of childhood experiences that Stella had found especially salient.  One day when Chauncey was five his father was trying to teach him how to catch a rubber ball. Each time it was thrown, Chauncey bobbled or dropped it. As his father became increasingly enraged, Chauncey lost the will to try. Finally, the father could take it no longer and slapped his son’s unmanly face. The boy screamed and ran into the house, into the comforting bosom of his mother. To console him she pronounced words that would mark him forever: “Daddy’s a mean man,”


A month later his mother was making desperate telephone calls trying to find out why her husband had not come home for dinner. The man had disappeared; no one knew where he was. As Chauncey’s sister Yvette was trying to console her brother, he blurted out: “Good. I hope he never comes home.” Everyone stayed up late awaiting the man’s arrival. He rolled in at 12:30 and never bothered to offer an explanation.


Chauncey’s parents fought often and violently.  The young man remembered his mother in tears, crumbled on the floof, his father standing over her like a conquering hero. Later he would learn of his father’s mistress and his mother’s hysterical complaints about feeling rejected.


The boy had always dreaded his father, but he often fantasized about fighting him for his mother’s sake. And then, one day when he was nine, Chauncey had come home early from school, only to find his half-undressed mother in the arms of the plumber. His mother begged him not to tell his father. She seemed to fear for her life.


Chauncey also blamed his mother for being chronically inattentive and absent-minded. She was almost never around when he came home from school. Dinners were hit-or-miss affairs; until Yvette took over the role of homemaker and provided more stable routines. Since his mother was a real estate broker she spent most of her weekends showing houses, leaving Chauncey at the mercy of his disapproving father.


Claude was thinking that the more Chauncey sided with his mother the more he had been stripped of his manhood. And yet, within the family the options for becoming a man were none too appealing. If Chauncey had done his father’s bidding and become a divorce lawyer he would have compromised his moral character. If this is what it meant to be a man, better not to be one. By remaining faithful to his mother Chauncey had punished his father, but at a very high price.


While waiting for Chauncey to arrive for his second session Claude decided that he had heard rather enough horror stories. Chauncey’s commitment to these stories was eating away at him. Left unchallenged they would surely destroy him.


Psychoanalysis had offered the young man a certain version of his past history; it was certainly not the only account. And nothing said that he had to embrace it. By selecting the most sordid episodes and the most ignoble motivations Chauncey had placed himself in a double bind. Any success he achieved would redound to his father’s benefit and would break faith with his mother. But if he fulfilled his unspoken pact with his mother, he would sacrifice his chance for happiness in his own life. The more miserable Chauncey became, the more he would feel morally triumphant.


At Chauncey’s second session Claude was ready to refocus their work, to take charge of the situation, and to lead Chauncey out of his mind-- and the attendant narratives. He understood that his new client excelled at free association and would use it to evade all relevant issues. If he fell back on questions of desire Chauncey would have an excuse to avoid the moral issues he could not face.


Claude suspected that Chauncey’s life was anything but dull and anything but normal. Perhaps his insistence on telling his past history masked a keen embarrassment with his present circumstances, coupled with a wish to have license to avoid dealing with it.


Rather than wait for Chauncey to begin the second session, Claude spoke first to express his favorable impression of the young man’s intellectual acuity. Then he shifted abruptly to more present concerns, though in a roundabout fashion: “Have you come to me because something from your past still haunts you? Do you feel that your analysis was incomplete?”


“Not at all,” Chauncey admitted, “I am quite happy with my analysis. No, the problem is that things have not been going well in my life. I think I need more guidance than analysis, and that is your reputation.”


Chauncey said he was tempted to return to Stella, but he was afraid that she would take it as a reproach. Nor could he remand himself to one of Stella’s colleagues; he was a famous patient, a great success story, and that fact that he was undergoing a nervous collapse suggested that psychoanalysis had limited therapeutic value.


So, Chauncey sketched a picture of his current predicament. Currently he was working at a health food store. “You must know it,” he said. “It’s called the Good Earth.” There he occasionally personed-- they were not allowed to say manned-- the cash register and otherwise worked on arranging the foodstuffs-- bagging peanuts and stacking boxes of organic cereal-- and even helped the owner to select new items. The work hardly challenged this Yale graduate, but to his mind it offered a spiritual fulfillment that he could never have gained in a law office or a bank.


Speaking of banks, Chauncey quickly segued into a description of his current paramour, Ursula, with whom he had been sharing a spectacular Tribeca loft for the past twenty months. Clearly, he could not afford this lifestyle on the pittance he received from The Good Earth. The loft belonged to Ursula, an Amazonian bond trader at Goldman, Sachs.


Chauncey described her as tall, blonde, and almost beautiful. Known to her colleagues as the terror of the trading floor, Ursula had recently been named a managing director of the firm. Her ambition was to become the first female CEO of the firm. She had studied economics at Johns Hopkins and was All-American in lacrosse. She then attended Wharton and moved on to Goldman Sachs. She had made a great deal of money, for the company and for herself.


Intense and driven, Ursula rarely came home before 10:00 p.m. Chauncey took pride in her success and she rewarded his solicitous support with a great deal of affection. He explained that they were wonderfully happy together. Their sex life, he added, was excellent, and Ursula occasionally liked to be tied up and whipped. He added that she likes dominant men.


Chauncey’s male pride was not compromised by their income disparity. He expected that he would eventually receive a substantial inheritance from his father. On that score, Claude opined to himself, Chauncey was undoubtedly wrong.


Then he would be able to contribute to their coffers and would have more time for his aquarelles. He had forgotten to mention that watercolors were his great passion in life. Not because he or anyone else felt that he had any talent, and not because he saw it as a new career path, but because he enjoyed it. 


Ursula loved her man for what he was, not for what he had accomplished. After suffering through a series of unsatisfactory relationships with Wall Street types, she discovered Chauncey while shopping for Nepalese granola at The Good Earth. She thought he was cute, if a bit unkempt, but she picked him up, enticed him to her lair and took full advantage of him.


Of late, a series of troubling events had upset the equilibrium of Chauncey’s life and psyche. First, at Ursula’s company outing, Chauncey became trapped within a contingent of cigar smoking futures traders who were exchanging vulgar repartee, most of it at Chauncey’s expense. Whatever he said about his work at The Good Earth provoked derision. 


After the party, cruising down the thruway in her white Mercedes convertible, Chauncey felt seriously discouraged. The incident reminded him of his father’s abuse, so he attempted to analyze what had occurred. He saw the men as grandiose narcissists, out of touch with their feminine sides, but he could not regain his self-confidence.


Ursula, however, was working herself up into a fury, for having brought him to such an event. So she kept demeaning her colleagues. Not one of them could sustain a relationship with a woman. Without their fat wallets none of them would ever get laid. 


This made Chauncey ask her whether she had ever had sex with any of them, but she refused to confirm or deny. He was not consoled by the thought that his paramour had to stand up for him.


Several days later, as Chauncey continued to mope around the store in a protracted funk, one of his colleagues, Cassandra, invited him to lunch. Chauncey could not expose his abjection to this pretty twenty-year old, but she had felt so much compassion seeing his melancholic eyes that at one point she spontaneously grasped his hand. The softness of her touch produced a twinge of excitement, but Chauncey quickly told himself that she was being nice, not seductive. 


He had jumped to the wrong conclusion. Later in the afternoon, as he was arranging boxes of power bars in the basement storeroom, he abruptly turned around to find himself facing Cassandra. Before he had a chance to recoil he felt her lips on his. Suddenly, their lips were locked in a passionate embrace. Shocked was too weak a word to describe Chauncey’s seeming willingness to betray Ursula.


To be continued, next week.


I am happy to announce that I now have some free consulting hours in my life coaching practice. If you are interested, please email me at StuartSchneiderman@gmail.com.



Thursday, July 4, 2024

Destroying the Antichrist

Yesterday morning, there she was. The former communications director of the Biden White House, one Kate Bedingfield was on CNN, offering her expert analysis of the current political scene.

She looked like a perfectly rational human organism, until she opened her mouth. Then she ramped up her hysteria and proclaimed that Donald Trump was an existential threat to American democracy.


Speaking about empowerment. As we celebrate American independence we must recognize that it has given us dolts like Kate Bedingfield who is hard at work, now that she has retired from the White House, fomenting mass hysteria. 


We have already been told that the greatest existential threat to America is bad weather. And we have learned that the Supreme Court just threatened to make the American president into a king. 


Behind the notion that Trump is an existential threat to the Democratic Party-- which is what this really means-- lies a notion coined by one Laurence Tribe, emeritus law professor from Harvard. 


According to Tribe, notable leftist who once declared that Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor did not know as  much as she thought she knew about the law, Donald Trump was the Devil Incarnate, aka, the Antichrist.


To understand this rhetorical ploy we should recall the closing chapters of the book of Revelation. Call it the end of history or the end of days, the Biblical story tells us that when Christ returns to earth he will smite the Antichrist. Then the Heavenly City of Jerusalem will descend on the planet, as the bride of Christ.


Call it the City of God. Call it the Platonic Republic. You might even follow the lead of one Carl Becker who entitled a famous book: The Heavenly City of the Eighteenth Century Philosophers.


More recently, one Francis Fukuyama, a born-again neo-Hegelian, said that history was over and that liberal democracy had prevailed. It was Enlightenment era eschatology. It was of a piece with prior reflections about the City of God and the Republic and the Heavenly City.


Follow the logic of the narrative and you will conclude that no one needs to build a great city on the earth; one needs but destroy the obstacle that is preventing it from arriving.


So, it is not about building a city, but about removing an impediment. Once that is done the Heavenly City will, as if by magic, descend on the planet.


That is, you must await the second coming of Christ, or of a secular equivalent. At that point Christ will destroy the Antichrist and will save you the trouble of building anything. 


In today’s political parlance, the Antichrist is named Donald Trump. His detractors believe that he is the root cause of everything that goes wrong. They do not bother to build anything; they are dedicated to the task of destroying Trump.


One understands that this narrative does not need a builder. It must appeal especially to people who are incapable of building anything. 


If you introduce a builder, he is obviously an obstacle to the more important task of ridding the world of the Antichrist. 


Your option is to denounce the root of all evil, the Antichrist, or else, to go out and to build something. The first requires that you live in a fictional world. The second requires you to deal with reality.


So the anti-Trumpers are selling a narrative. They are offering you a place within the narrative. And they promise that once they smite the Antichrist a new world of justice and peace will descend on the planet.


We note that the building option requires far more intelligence and competence than the option that involves destroying the Antichrist. Perhaps that is why people with more limited intelligence and more limited experience in the world are drawn to the solution wherein destroying the Antichrist causes the Heavenly City to descend on the planet… automatically.


Please subscribe to my Substack, for free or preferably for a fee.

Wednesday, July 3, 2024

Wednesday Potpourri

First, the cerebrally challenged Alexander Vindman, of Trump impeachment fame, said this:

What did Trump do during his four years to end the Russia-Ukraine war? Nothing. Trump is full of shit.


To which someone who calls himself Comfortably Smug responded on Twitter:


Well you see, Russia didn't invade Ukraine until after Trump left, you absolute moron Dems are in total disarray


Second, our vaunted military cannot build a pier in Southern Gaza. And it cannot stop the Houthis from terrorizing shipping in the Red Sea.


But, it is all-in with diversity training.


The New York Post reports on a study conducted by Center for American Institutions at Arizona State University.


Herewith, some words from the executive summary:


“The massive DEI bureaucracy, its training and its pseudo-scientific assessments are at best distractions that absorb valuable time and resources,” the executive summary states. “At worst they communicate the opposite of the military ethos: e.g. that individual demographic differences come before team and mission.”


Third, in the meantime American corporations have been touting the virtues of diversity and inclusion because a consulting firm, McKinsey told them to do so. 


It turns out that the correlation was incorrect. The Wall Street Journal reports:


When management consulting firm McKinsey declared in 2015 that it had found a link between profits and executive racial and gender diversity, it was a breakthrough. The research was used by investors, lobbyists and regulators to push for more women and minority groups on boards, and to justify investing in companies that appointed them.


Of course, the companies have been trying it out. They have discovered that it doesn't work:


Since 2015, the approach has been tested in the fire of the marketplace and failed. Academics have tried to repeat McKinsey’s findings and failed, concluding that there is in fact no link between profitability and executive diversity. And the methodology of McKinsey’s early studies, which helped create the widespread belief that diversity is good for profits, is being questioned.


Fourth, speaking of diversity hires, the ultimate version is the Chairman of the European Commission, one Ursula von der Leyen.


It turns out, she is something of a plagiarist and a fraud. This comes from George Georgiou, at Naked Capitalism:


Questions about VDL’s lack of probity first surfaced in 2015 when she was accused of plagiarising her doctoral dissertation. She was eventually cleared of the accusations but as the BBC reported on 9 March 2016, the president of the Hannover Medical School, Christopher Baum, conceded that “Ms von der Leyen’s thesis did contain plagiarised material”, but he added “there had been no intent to deceive”. Her first lucky escape.


VDL’s lack of probity continued while she served as Germany’s Minister of Defence between 2013 and 2019. During her tenure at the ministry, she became embroiled in a scandal regarding payments of €250 million to consultants related to arms contracts. Germany’s Federal Audit Office found that, of the €250 million declared for consultancy fees, only €5.1 million had been spent. Furthermore, one of the consultants was McKinsey & Company, where VDL’s son was an associate, thus raising a possible conflict of interest. It also emerged that messages related to the contracts had been deleted from two of VDL’s mobile phones. Although she was eventually cleared of corruption allegations, questions over her probity during that period remain to this day.


Of course, there’s more to this story, but that should suffice.


Fifth, we have followed this story from the onset, but now everyone seems to understand that shutting down schools during the pandemic was extremely damaging for young children. 


The New York Times reports:


The pandemic’s babies, toddlers and preschoolers are now school-age, and the impact on them is becoming increasingly clear: Many are showing signs of being academically and developmentally behind.


Interviews with more than two dozen teachers, pediatricians and early childhood experts depicted a generation less likely to have age-appropriate skills — to be able to hold a pencil, communicate their needs, identify shapes and letters, manage their emotions or solve problems with peers.


A variety of scientific evidence has also found that the pandemic seems to have affected some young children’s early development. Boys were more affected than girls, studies have found.


“I definitely think children born then have had developmental challenges compared to prior years,” said Dr. Jaime Peterson, a pediatrician at Oregon Health and Science University, whose research is on kindergarten readiness. “We asked them to wear masks, not see adults, not play with kids. We really severed those interactions, and you don’t get that time back for kids.”


The pandemic’s effect on older children — who were sent home during school closures, and lost significant ground in math and reading — has been well documented. But the impact on the youngest children is in some ways surprising: They were not in formal school when the pandemic began, and at an age when children spend a lot of time at home anyway.


The early years, though, are most critical for brain development. Researchers said several aspects of the pandemic affected young children — parental stress, less exposure to people, lower preschool attendance, more time on screens and less time playing.


Yet because their brains are developing so rapidly, they are also well positioned to catch up, experts said.


The youngest children represent “a pandemic tsunami” headed for the American education system, said Joel Ryan, who works with a network of Head Start and state preschool centers in Washington State, where he has seen an increase in speech delays and behavioral problems.


Naturally, minority children were the most damaged. This should not come as news.


As for recovering the loss, the psycho professionals interviewed by the Times suggest that it can be done. And yet, one suspects that they have a stake in optimism.


Sixth, meanwhile on the West Bank…. You will recall that those who have been trying to save Hamas by hobbling the Israeli military have proposed an alliance with the Palestinian Authority, the group that does not rule Gaza, but that does rule the West Bank.


As for the chances that the Palestinian Authority will be a partner for peace, you cannot be serious. In fact, the notion is so unserious that the New York Times reports on terrorist infiltration into the West Bank. And it reports that the PA has ceded authority to Hamas and Islamic Jihad.


Tommy Friedman should read the New York Times:


I recently met a local commander of these young militants, Muhammad Jaber, 25, in one of those dusty, shattered alleyways. One of Israel’s most wanted men, he and other fighters like him say they have switched allegiances from the relatively moderate Fatah faction, which dominates the Israeli-occupied West Bank, to more radical groups like Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad since the Hamas-led attack on Israel on Oct. 7.


More weapons and explosives are being manufactured in the West Bank, according to both the fighters themselves and Israeli military officials. They say the Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority, which runs parts of the West Bank, is losing ground to the more radical Palestinian factions, who are actively fighting Israel and gaining more support from Iran in the form of cash and weapons smuggled into the territory.


Fatah recognizes Israel’s right to exist and cooperates with its army. But some of the militants affiliated to Fatah, part of the Aqsa Martyrs Brigades crucial to the second intifada of the early 2000s, have never respected the Palestinian Authority and its compromises with Israel and the occupation. Some have, like Mr. Jaber, simply declared their new allegiance to the more hard-line Islamist factions.


As I said, taking the Palestinian Authority as a partner for peace is a fool’s errand.


Seventh, as for the American insistence on Israeli restraint, the result of this restraint, enforced by refusing to send certain weapons, is the resurgence of Hamas.


The Wall Street Journal reports:


Palestinian militants fired one of the largest barrages toward Israel in months on Monday while Israeli forces reengaged with Hamas fighters in a Gaza City neighborhood they had previously invaded, signs the conflict risks becoming a protracted war of attrition as militants regroup and rearm.  


Palestinian Islamic Jihad, an ally of Hamas, said it fired rockets at southern Israel. The Israeli military said the attack was largely intercepted, caused no damage and consisted of 20 projectiles that came from the area of Khan Younis. Israel carried out a monthslong operation there against militant groups that ended in early April. 


The barrage reinforced the challenge for Israel as it seeks to pursue a counterinsurgency campaign against militants who retain rocket and mortar firing capabilities almost nine months into the Israeli campaign to destroy them. 


“We are nearing the end of the stage of the destruction of Hamas’s terror army and will have to target its remnants going forward,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a speech on Monday, in a sign that Israel is preparing to move to a new phase in the fighting.


Eighth, follow the money, isn’t that the correct phrase. Now The College Fix reports on the contributions made to American universities by Arab countries. Surely, this has an influence on university policy.


About one in four foreign dollars donated to American universities in the past four decades have come from Arabic countries, many of whom are hostile to Israel.


A total of $13 billion have come from Arabic countries, out of about $55 billion total.


The latest report from the American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise “documents the substantial sums contributed by donors from Arab states and the resulting pressure on universities to avoid teaching or research that might offend them.”


A Department of Education February 2024 report “lists 24 donations worth $11,618,000, all from ‘Palestinian territories,’” according to the group. However, the United States does not official recognize a separate Palestinian state.


“It also flags transparency issues and the potential influence of Arab governments on U.S. universities,” the report states.


Mitchell Bard, the report’s author and AICE’s executive director, provided further commentary to The College Fix via email.


“Funding can be an incentive/disincentive to take a particular position. E.g., Qatar would want positive research about its government and be upset over research on Al Jazeera, radical Islam, or corruption in its World Cup bid,” Bard (pictured) told The Fix. “Faculty may teach skewed versions of history, downplaying for example terrorism.”


He said, “universities should be required to report what foreign funds are specifically used for and their sources and this information should be published by [the Department of Education].”


“Departments should be policed so they do not take political positions,” Bard told The Fix. The ‘academic’ needs to be put back into academic freedom,” he said.


His group does not want to “vilify Arab funding sources,” according to the report. Rather, it wants to see “transparency measures to safeguard academic integrity, foster a health exchange of ideas,” and “ensure” funding is not being used to “sway” research, curriculum, and “faculty recruitment.”


The top four recipients of Arab donations since 1981 are all prestigious research universities – Cornell University, Georgetown University, Texas A&M University, and Carnegie Mellon University, top the list.


Ninth, the most shocking part of this diagnosis is that the mainstream media does not seem very interested. A retired neurologist wrote to The Free Press to offer-- anonymously-- his diagnosis of our president:


Neurologists frequently make diagnoses by observation. In fact, most movement disorder diagnoses are made by direct observation or description by patients and families. Mr. Biden has Parkinsonism, an umbrella term that refers to neurologic conditions that cause slowed movements, rigidity, and tremors. By observation, he has a masked face, reduced blinking, stiff and slow gait, hunched posture, low volume voice, imbalance, freezing, mild cognitive disturbance, and difficulty turning. I have seen one video of tremor. All these diagnose Parkinsonism. 


He would need further investigation by experts to determine which specific disease within the broad term he has, such as idiopathic Parkinson’s disease or another specific disease.


While there is no cure for the many conditions comprising Parkinsonism, there are effective treatments for many of the symptoms. By failing to get a diagnosis, the president is denying himself such treatments, and so worsens his own situation.


Meanwhile, I have some free consulting hours in my life coaching practice. Please contact me at StuartSchneiderman@gmail.com.


Please subscribe to my Substack, for free or preferably for a fee.