Driver
Fascism
Over the past twenty years or so, a number of countries have fallen under the control of “strong men” governments that in some respects resemble the fascist and imperialist governments of the 1930’s. For example, Vladimir Putin, a former executive in the Soviet Union’s Secret Service (an essential part of any fascist government for spying on and controlling its people) took charge of Russia and prevented its evolution into a democratic state. Recep Erdogan has taken over Turkey and turned it from a secular, majority Muslim state into a proto-fascist semi-secular Muslim state. Xi Jinping has taken power in China and prevented it from evolving from a Communist-totalitarian state.
From a NYT article on Donald Trump and the other countries in the world that have fascist-leaning governments:
The debate about terminology may ignore the seriousness of the conditions that gave rise to Mr. Trump and his European counterparts. The New York real estate developer has tapped into a deep discontent in a country where many feel left behind while Wall Street banks get bailouts, newcomers take jobs, terrorists threaten innocents and China rises economically at America’s expense.
“It seems to me in developed and semideveloped countries there is emerging a new kind of politics for which maybe the best taxonomic category would be right-wing populist nationalism,” said Stanley Payne, a professor emeritus at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. “We are seeing a new kind of phenomenon which is different from what you had” in the 20th century.
Roger Eatwell, a professor at the University of Bath, in England, calls it “illiberal democracy,” a form of government that keeps the trappings of democracy without the reality.
“Elections are seen as important to legitimizing regimes,” he said, but instead of imposing one-party rule, as in the past, today’s authoritarians “use a variety of devices to control and/or manipulate the media, intimidate opponents” and so on.
Either way, it has found pockets of support on both sides of the Atlantic. Lilia Shevtsova, a political analyst in Moscow, said neo-fascism in liberal societies in the West stems from crisis or dysfunction while in illiberal countries like Russia and Turkey it reflects an attempt to fill the void left by the failure of Western notions to catch on.
The problem, she added, is that “the Western political leadership at the moment is too weak to fight the tide.”
The root of the problem in the US is weakness of the federal government. Since the election of 2000, there has been a widespread sense of disillusionment with American government. If you recall, the election was a three-way race, between George W. Bush, Ralph Nader, and Al Gore. Ralph Nader won 2.7% of the vote, enough to deny Al Gore a victory and throw the election to George W. Bush. The popular vote totals showed Al Gore with 50,999,897 (103 less than 51 million) or 48.38%, George W. Bush with 50,456,002 or 47.87%, and Ralph Nader with 2,882,955.
The conclusion from the overall voting is that a majority of American voters preferred Al Gore or someone “more liberal” like Ralph Nader of the Association of State Green Parties (on the ballot in only 43 states.) Allowing for the increased percentage of voters actually going to the polls and the likelihood that those who cannot vote for whatever reason are oriented more to the left than those who can and do vote, the majority of the American people in 2000 were in favor of more left-wing or liberal policies than those of George W. Bush. Yet Bush was inaugurated and proceeded to take America far to the right with a side order of economic chaos.
The invasion of Iraq and the destabilization of the economy were the legacies of this fake “democratic” election. Poor economic growth led to poor job growth and an increase in personal debt to unsustainable levels. Personal bankruptcies increased despite the tightened bankruptcy laws passed by a confused Congress. The crisis in 2007-8 led to a collapse in the net worth of many middle-class people who lost their jobs and the equity in their homes.
Congress acted to save the economy from collapse by shoring up the big banks; the number of banks has decreased from 32 to four. Congress did not act to save the middle class consumer from the loss of equity in homes and as a result, many people have lost all their “savings” (their borrowing ability) as well as their jobs. This action to save the banks and bankers but not the mortgagees became very public as a sign that Congress is in the hands of those who can afford to pay for their services, not those who have voted them into power.
The results of this travesty of democracy have been a complete loss of confidence for the American people in the political system. Lacking confidence that the system will support them, they vote for the candidates who promise to “Make America Great Again.” They don’t care about democracy and the protection of human rights as much as they care about government that works.
Here’s a link to an insightful cartoon that explains a great deal of what is now scientifically figured out about how people become conservative or liberal, hippies or preppies. This is based on the work of Jonathon Haidt in the book “The Righteous Mind”, that is on his interpretation of recent scientific studies about human (and animal) development. Here’s a link to Haidt’s website. He’s got a lot of interesting essays on line in addition to his book. The cartoon was originally done in Brazil, so it is translated to English.
The original refers to a split in the student society of a university into two groups: “hippies” and “preppies” ( to loosely translate the original terms ) who display disparate personal and social characteristics somewhat typical of the nicknames given and who live in separate groups. The original university, was, I think, in Brazil, and it was a large state university. It is interesting and important for those of us in the US to be aware that there are huge areas of cultural ferment in other countries (such as Brazil.)
I took a look at the website that the book’s author maintains. Jonathon Haidt doesn’t like the new phenomenon of “trigger warnings” in university classes. These warnings are posted when “scary” material is going to be discussed, things that might upset certain people. He calls it “vindictive protectiveness.” I think it’s a little silly but relatively harmless to point out to people who are unaware that certain awful things are going to come up. It kind of puts everything out in the open so that everyone knows that there’s going to be some action. On the other hand, it might seem to some that people are being coddled when this sort of thing is said. I don’t know.
There’s a lot more controversy there. There is an issue where some people claim their own frailty and demand that it be “respected” or else “coddled.” This is what he calls the “victimhood culture.” There is also an issue that some call “microaggressions” that is, little things that people do or assume that are disrespectful of others who are sensitive to their own victimhood. This gets even more silly to me, but I don’t mind. Let the controversies roll. It sounds like Jonathon Haidt has been made into a conservative. Not me.
A new study in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences predicts, on the basis of known relationships of abundance and diversity, that there are approximately 10 to the 12th power (a trillion) species existing on Earth, give or take an order of magnitude. The conclusion is based on combining all the surveys of plant, animal, and microbial species numbers that have been done in the last forty years. The surveys of microbes done recently determine the number of species in a sample by the number of different DNA strands found.
Prochlorococcus marinus, first identified in 1986, turns out to be the most abundant organism in the ocean. P. marinus is very small, roughly 0.6 micrometer in size, with a small genome. There are roughly 2000 genes or less on the circular genome; many less important genes have been stripped away, and many genes that might be needed for flexibility are missing as well. Recall from my previous post that the minimal organism needs about 400-500 genes just to function. P. marinus has even combined some enzymes into a single all-purpose protein: a single enzyme does the work of four enzymes used by more bulky organisms.
To compare, eukaryotic algae that are photosynthetic have about 10,000 genes, and humans have roughly 25,000. The small genome and small size means these organisms are abundant: there can be 100,000 cells of P. marinus in a milliliter of water. There are two main types of P. marinus, one that lives in the upper, brightly lit ocean above 100 meters depth, and a second that lives in deeper regions of 80 to 200 meters depth. The lower light form is more efficient at absorbing blue light, which penetrates deeper into the water.
P. marinus is important because it is the most efficient fixer of carbon dioxide in the ocean: it takes carbon from the air, fixes it into proteins, and releases oxygen. This process is powered by the absorption of light from the sun and is the foundation of the oxygen-rich atmosphere that we enjoy. This organism is joined by an almost equally abundant and similar organism called Synechococcus, which uses a different form of chlorophyll.
Synechococcus is larger than P. marinus. There are at least five types of Synechococcus, differing in size, chlorophyll types, sensitivity to salt, motility, and so on. These larger organisms also abundantly inhabit fresh water, whereas P. marinus is solely found in marine waters. They also use urea as well as ammonia as a nitrogen source, and prefer nutrient-rich waters, where their larger genome allows more flexibility in growth.
The information about these organisms was extracted from Wikipedia and another “wiki” called microbewiki, where you can see micrographs and genetic information as well as a graph of the enzymatic pathways that P. marinus uses.
There has been speculation that seeding the ocean with iron will stimulate the growth of P. marinus so much that all the excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would be removed. This idea has been studied extensively, but there has not been any conclusion, nor, more importantly, any large-scale attempts to prove that this process might work. There is (or was) a company called Climos that was founded by Dan Whaley, a “veteran Silicon Valley entrepeneur” who founded GetThere in 1994. He and others put together a consortium called ISIS (in situ iron studies) that has a website, but like Climos, everything on the site is more than five years old. I suspect that they have hit a wall.
Comment of the Day
Rosemary
new jersey
It’s pretty simple…she has been beaten up by the GOP since the 90’s. That’s over 25 years of Repuglicans trying to find something, something, anything to pin on her and her husband to discredit them. She hasn’t helped herself with the email disaster and the speaking fees. However, nothing she has done has warranted this kind of hatred. Part of it is that she’s a woman and there are still lots of people who don’t like strong women. I know, I’m one of them and we have to fight every day to be as recognized as men with the same or even lesser capabilities. Part of the problem is her “stiffness”; she really doesn’t project warmth or sincerity. She is stoic, she is strong, she is driven, so what? Isn’t that what we want in a President? President Obama is extremely likable. One could imagine meeting him and feeling very at ease and trusting. But every good President isn’t the same. As long as there is confidence, a decent moral compass and acuity for the job, I’ll take her. What we don’t want is a shill who’s main focus is himself, who really could care less about the average American. What we need is someone who is less about closing a deal and more about creating an accepting, open country, someone who will be respected by foreign leaders and whose temperament will allow for clear headed decisions. True, I’d Rather meet and do fun things with Barack in a heartbeat. But do I think she is capable of running the country…yes I do. So let’s get this done people…remember SCOTUS!
[this comment received over 700 recommendations]
This comment is attached to a NYT article about Hillary Clinton’s “unpopularity” ratings, which are said to be as high as Donald Drumpf’s ratings. How stupid can the American people be? Are Americans really so gullible that they will accept as a politician a narcissistic, infantile billionaire? Discuss.
The United Nations has a very convenient set of graphs showing its predictions for the population of the world and all its regions through the year 2100 (approximately the next 80 years): the web site is here. The current population of this section of the world, as of, say, 2020, is a little over a billion on the graph. By the year 2100, the center of the projection is for about 3.25 billion people, an increase of triple. So in the next eighty years, the population of the least-developed part of the world will triple, more or less.
The low end of the projection (a 95% probability) is for a little over 2.5 billion; the high end is 4 billion.
At the same time, the population of the world as a whole will not increase nearly as much: from a current population approaching eight billion, the whole world will probably only reach eleven billion. The uncertainties are significant, however, from less than ten billion to more than thirteen billion, at a 95% probability. The reason the population of the world doesn’t increase that much is that the highly developed parts of the world will stop growing entirely. The current population of the most developed part of the world is currently about 1.25 billion and will never reach 1.3 billion, even by 2100.
The UN has isolated a group of countries that will not grow at all in the next eighty years, and another group that will triple in population in the same time. These countries differ by level of development in terms of dollars: the highest gross domestic product per person results in the lowest birthrate. Development reduces birthrate partly by increasing opportunity for contraception but also by improving a sense of security which reduces the perception of a need for a large family. Improved security in old age reduces the need for offspring to care for the aged. The bottom line is development, meaning technology and money. Spreading the wealth requires stimulating trade and industry as well as infrastructure development. All these things require a competent, wealthy government.
The United States would be in a good position to stimulate development in the rest of the world if it had an activist government that worked at projects overseas. By the same token, stimulation of other economies will result in positive feedback to our country and increase our GDP.
Disclaimer
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed here belong only to the author(s) and do not reflect the views of any organization. Any medical discussion on this page is intended to be of a general nature only. This page is not designed to give specific medical advice. If you have a medical problem you should consult your own physician for advice specific to your own situation.
[adapted from PLOS blog “Obesity Panacea”]
“He’s an ignorant, amoral, dishonest and manipulative, misogynistic, philandering, hyper-litigious, isolationist, protectionist blowhard,” one donor said. The New York Times reports that only nine of forty traditional super-PAC donors would commit themselves to supporting Donald Trump as they have other Republican candidates. Some supporters say they would only consider backing him if he dramatically dialed back on his inflammatory statements.
One of the most notorious Republican big money donors is Sheldon Adelson, and he supports Donald Trump; this contribution alone could amount to 20 to 100 million dollars. A billion dollars is needed altogether for the entire Presidential campaign, win or lose. Some potential donors have even said that based on Trump’s own statements, he should be able to fund his campaign from his own resources.
The truth is probably that Mr. Trump’s cash worth is nowhere near what he claims it to be. He is probably unable to raise a billion dollars in cash between now and election day, even if his net worth including all his properties is over a billion dollars, even if it is ten billion dollars. Most of his assets are probably in highly illiquid properties or objects that he would have some difficulty raising cash from to support a political campaign.
In the last Presidential election, Obama raised more money than his Republican opponent, despite his net worth; this demonstrates the difference between net worth and cash flow. There is also the possibility that the big money realized that Obama was likely to win and didn’t waste their money supporting a losing candidate. Whether the big money demonstrates that type of foresight or not, it is likely that Mrs. Clinton will raise more money than Mr. Trump, and by a large margin.
If this look at the future of the fundraising situation holds the same over the next few weeks, we can be reassured that Clinton will outpace Drumpf in fundraising and votes, with a final margin of victory that will resemble the loss of Goldwater to Johnson in 1964.
Reparations for Economic Damages of Slavery
Much has been spoken and written on the subject of reparations. Some people suggest that it is not fair to ask current societies, peoples, and governments to make amends in monetary terms for the economic costs of slavery, which was abolished in the United States in 1860-1865, with only partial effect in the Southern States until the 1960’s.
These arguments have been hypothetical, but here is a concrete example of economic values that can be documented: in 1838, Georgetown University was forced to sell a number of their slaves to pay off a huge debt that would have otherwise put them out of operation. Georgetown was run by the religious order of Jesuits, but it still required cash to operate. The sale was documented with the dollar amounts received and the names of the slaves sold, and to whom, is known. They were sold to owners in Louisiana, and the conditions under which they were held deteriorated. The great-great-great-grandchildren of these slaves are known and their ancestry has been confirmed with documents.
For example, the slaves Bill and Mary Ann Hill have a great-great-grandson named Charles Hill, who is 74 years old. He had this to say about what the current Georgetown University administration might need to do to make reparations for the sale of his great-great-grandparents: (from this NYT article)
What should Georgetown do? Put up a monument with our forefathers’ names on there. Give some scholarships to the kids. I’m 74. I’m on my way out of this world. If I could leave something behind to educate my grandkids, that’s what I would like to do.
That’s not much, is it? Symbolic recognition that something happened a long time ago that we would do differently now. It reminds me of the man in Germany who has a years-long project that produces small bronze plaques that he affixes to the sidewalk in front of houses from which Jews were removed by the Nazis, with the names of the victims, so people can remember something that happened a long time ago that shouldn’t have happened.
86 year old man shoots his 78 year old wife because she’s in pain and can’t afford medication
According to a report in CNN on Wednesday, a Florida man shot his wife while she slept, then called his children and finally the police. He was charged with first-degree murder. He was quoted as saying he did it because she was in pain and they couldn’t afford the medications that she was prescribed. From CNN, May 18, 2016:
A man in Florida told police he killed his wife because she was in poor health and they could no longer afford the medications necessary for her care, according to an arrest affidavit from the St. Lucie County Sheriff’s Office.
“Hager stated Carolyn had a lot of illnesses and other ailments which required numerous medications. Hager stated he could no longer afford the medications needed for Carolyn’s care, thus decided to shoot her this morning.”
Here’s a link to the CNN article. My personal feelings about this incident are commiseration, anger, despair, and a feeling that, but for the grace of G-d, I could be in the same situation.
The last statement on the video in the CNN article was “In many cases, the prescription drug companies will work with people who can’t afford medication.” I’ve heard that lie so many times. The company claims that they will help you but they don’t really. You can’t find a way to contact them that they will respond to. Write a letter? Make a phone call? Don’t kid me.
The opportunistic behavior of the drug companies deserves criminal prosecution but there is nothing an ordinary person can do. Banding together in a massive group of people who have nothing left to lose and using force on the offending individuals is counterproductive. There is no single individual responsible; it is a large group of people with positions throughout the drug manufacturing companies from the chief executive officer down to the board of directors and the junior executives, even down to the advertising or “detailing” people who individually buttonhole the doctors who prescribe these drugs. Even the doctors share responsibility for this massive, sadistic, industry-wide, opportunistic, money-grubbing rip-off.
This is a sickness that pervades the medical services complex, from hospital board rooms down to individual doctor’s offices and across boundaries to presidents, senators, and leaders of all stripes. It is an American sickness that somehow European Union countries have managed to repel; for reasons I don’t understand, the ripoff of individual patients for copays and deductibles doesn’t exist in Germany, France, or Britain. Why is it that European citizens are not afflicted by this monetary vampirism of the medical industry?
How long will this go on? How many people have to commit suicide because they are painted into a corner by medical expenses before action is taken to relieve the common American people from this burden? Why are Americans being nibbled to death by copays, sales taxes, moving violations, fines and misdemeanors, payday loan companies, credit card scammers, and disability fraudsters?
I give up. I am in despair over this evil system whose shadow covers every innocent American.
Conrad Theodore Seitz 