Truth is Essential to Democracy

          The case can be made for explaining America’s political divide on failure of the body politic to agree on the truth of facts.  For example, the American Enterprise Institute’s January survey finding that 66 percent of Republicans believe that Biden’s victory was illegitimate. The truth of the matter is that the presidential election of 2020 was well conducted and remarkably free of tampering or distortion.  So, what are we dealing with?  Are we dealing with an instance of mass brainwashing?  Is it possible that a president can condition the collective minds of his party and followers to believe an outcome by repeating month after month that defeat could only be due to manipulating the results of a national election, whose voting system has been through the years remarkably honest?  I find it almost impossible to know how to think about this issue. I do not know where to start, but let us by sidestepping the journalists, pollsters and pundits, and begin with the social scientists.

          Rasmus Klein Nielsen, Director at the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at the University of Oxford writes that, “First, on social science, I don’t think we can understand the 2020 election outcome without putting identity in center place, especially if we are to understand why many white Americans have responded favorably to Trump’s explicit racial appeals.” He goes on to elaborate that, “voting has its origins “in ethnic, sectional, class, and family traditions” and is a matter of sentiment and disposition rather than “reasoned preferences”, an approach further develop in the “Michigan model” that put party identification at the center. I think I can understand that summation in that in my own family growing up in the last mid-century in western New York State, in sum, believed in the Catholic Church, General Motors, and the Republican Party—sort of a cultural triad. Nielsen cites Ashley Jardins’s White Identity Politics as a likely cause and not for any of the other crazy reasons. We can at least start there and ask if consultants, pollsters, lobbyists, and think tankers, if they have anything to add to the social scientists’ conclusion have anything to contribute. We know that social science may not be as precise as medical science, which has many forms of quackery, but “white identity politics” is a strong argument, in my research, the strongest.  Trump is clearly not the cause, but certainly the latest symptom of a very bad disease corrupting Truth.  I cannot believe that white identity politics is the entire reason for the irrationality of the rampant conspiracy theories permeating the social media of the country. What of the incredible irrationality of Republican party leadership?  An example is the criticism faced by Pennsylvania Senator Pat Toomey after voting to support the second impeachment of former President Donald Trump.

          Washington county (PA) Republican Chair Dave Ball in a TV interview [1], viciously attacked Senator Toomey for justifying his vote to convict Trump on the charge of inciting the violent January 6th riot at the US Capitol with the absurd statement,” We did not send him to Washington to vote his conscience   We did not send him there to do the right thing or whatever he said he was doing.  We sent him there to represent us, and we feel very strongly that he did not represent us”.  That statement stands as a marker for all time. The same reference continues reporting that, “York County, PA Republicans voted to censure Toomey over the weekend, arguing that he is out of touch with the core beliefs of the people of Pennsylvania.  But Not Out of touch with Truth!  The message is, we have to solve this problem or we will not keep our democracy.

  ======================       

[1]. Santucci, Jeanine. Impeachment Vote Brings Censure. 2021. USA TODAY, Rochester Democrat & Chronicle Feb 18, 2021.

 

What Have I Learned from the Transition of Trump to Biden?

    The first lesson that I learned pertains to the 25^th Amendment of the Constitution.  The Vice-President of the United States refused to employ the amendment.  Vice-President Pence wrote that using the 25^th Amendment to remove Trump would “set a terrible precedent”. Instead, he argued that it should only be used in instances where the president is incapacitated or has a disability that prevents him from carrying out the duties of the office.  He refused to act even after directed to do so by a vote by the House of Representatives. Essentially the people in their congress asked Pence to do something and he refused to do it or even answer the call.

     Two points here.  What was meant by a “terrible precedent”? We may never know.  Secondly, there is a solid argument for declaring that the president has a disability that prevents him from carrying out the duties of the office. It seems that Pence was assuming that the entire decision was his.  It is not. The 25^th amendment states,

 Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

      At the time of Pence’s statement, there were already several resignations of cabinet members, leaving that element in flux, therefore quite unworkable.   Note there is no time limit on the period of deliberation regarding the question of disability.  Finally, with the extreme divisions between the two political parties, this entire Section 4 process is essentially unworkable.  I can only conclude therefore, that the both the 25^th Amendment and the impeachment process are nothing but blunt instruments, particularly in the presence of a true emergency, particularly a mental health crisis with which I believe we are dealing.  It is also my belief, that Pence would never exercise his 25^th Amendment option no matter what because of fear of political consequences.  It is clear to even the superficial critic that the Congress must address the 25 Amendment and provide for more specific and reliable language.

   The second lesson is that the myth that vote-by-mail is susceptible to widespread fraud was propagated by a “coordinated disinformation campaign” by President Donald Trump and other Republican elites, not by fringe internet actors commonly associated with “fake news”. *  For months prior to the election, Trump insisted that voting by mail was corrupt and illegal.  He repeated this lie so often that a large segment of the population began to believe. In the face of the clear reality that he had lost the election by over seven million votes, he insisted incessantly that he had not only won, but “in a landslide”.  The was not the work of a nickel-dime manipulator, but a symptom of a very mentally ill man who sad to say needs help he will never get.  Never get because no one wants to discuss the truth.

     Watch what the Republicans do now.  At the state level where possible, they will do all in their power to introduce legislation and pass it to block black and brown citizens from voting.

     The third lesson is that the entire spectrum of conspiracy theories particularly the QAnon phenomenon was and is much more widespread and serious derangement of the collective minds of right-wing conservatives and Trumpsters than was imagined.  Millions of Americans have embraced these delusions or believe lies propagated on chat rooms? What do you do with people who believe without question, that the world is run by a cabal of Satan-worshiping pedophiles who are plotting against Mr. Trump while operating a global child sex-trafficking ring?  It is the second Trump-supported pandemic. It is much more serious that any Kool-Aid drinking religious fanatics of yesteryear.  This was most evident on the January 6^th assault on the government.  At best, this will take years to repair—this loss of respect for the truth and regard for facts.

     Perhaps we need, as the New York Times [Feb 4^th] ** suggested, a “Reality Czar”, since we are dealing with the nation’s mental health as well as its safety and other social issues as well.  It will require a long and costly common effort.  Control of information feeds into Twitter, Facebook, U-Tube and other platforms will involve ranking the level of truth.  It will be accused of attacking Freedom of Speech, but it is necessary to building our survival as a free educated society. It is what Biden means by uniting the country.

================================

*[ref; Report by Berkman Klein Center for Internet & society].

** Roose, Kevin.” How the Biden Administration can Help Solve Our Reality Crisis”. New York Times 4 Feb.2021.

 

If You See Something, Don’t Say Something?

     If you stroll through any airport, sooner or later the public address system will blast, “It you see something, say something”. No problem! We all agree. Well almost.  Everyone agrees except the psychiatrists, with respect to their self-imposed Goldwater Rule. The rule, named after the 1964 Arizona candidate for the presidency, Barry Goldwater—the Republican candidate, who displayed questionable symptoms of significant mental illness, was revised in l973 by the American Psychiatric Association in its first edition of its Code of Ethics [1]:

     It is unethical for a psychiatrist to offer a professional opinion unless he or she has conducted an examination and has been granted proper authorization for such a statement.

     On July 4, 2017. The Independent, a UK news source (May Bulman reporting) stated that a “group of psychiatrists at a Yale University conference warned that President Trump has a dangerous mental illness”.  There have been several petitions calling for removal from office on the grounds of mental illness. Other psychiatrists have argued that a mental health professional should not make a diagnosis public without examining the patient. It is my contention that if a public official has a physician-patient relationship with a psychiatrist, then that relationship should be bound to secrecy and the physician should not release or discuss any diagnosis without the express permission of the patient. This is considered standard patient confidentiality covering all mental health providers-public figure patients.

     But what if the public figure’s mental health affects the future of the country or of the world as Danny Wedding PhD, editor of PsyCRITQUES pointed out? [2] 

What if a public figure contests the outcome of a presidential election duly authorized as fair and square? Then you have added a different dimension to the conflict.  Then the Goldwater Rule becomes a gag order. If you are a practicing psychiatrist and on court order, conclude after examining a patient that that person is a clear danger to himself and others, you act accordingly.  It happens in our court system every day.  So, simple common sense tells us that the Goldwater Rule is ridiculous and worse, dangerous to the welfare of the state.  Patient-physician confidentiality is too narrow an argument.

     The APA should point out that psychiatrists have a professional, moral and social responsibility to notify the public of the danger consequent to the mental state of an elected official who is capable of great endangerment.  Failure to do so is not only gagging the science, but is thwarting the access to open discussion and freedom to engage in open debate in the public square.  The psychiatrists, indeed all mental health workers, by virtue of their education and training, should be the very people leading the education of the consequences of mental illness.

      I write this on January 4, 2021, two days before the Senate is to meet to formalize the Electoral College results, with the likelihood of open objections from twelve senators and over one hundred Republicans of the House stating their rejection of reality.  The president’s perception of reality has a pervasive effect. So I am saying something!

 

==========================================================

1. www.time.com/48975093/donald-trump-goldwater-rule-history/

2. www.apa.org/pubs/highlights/psyccritiques-spotlight/issue-20#:[EW1] 

---

 [EW1]

 

We Dodged the Bullet 

     Today is Thanksgiving, 2020, and I offer no apology for turning the day into a joyous political celebration. Yes, I am thankful for escaping the nasty covid-19 pandemic for nine months, and my family staying healthy as well.  Yes, I give thanks to whatever prime mover exists in the great unknown for living long enough to start my 90^th year in a couple of weeks, free of dementia.  Thanks, after more than 25 years of retirement, we are solvent and have not run out of money. Yes, and thanks for so many wonderful friends, staying busy every day and living in a comfortable senior community free of dogs and as far as I can tell, republicans.

     But that is not what I celebrate most today.  No, today I give thanks for the salvaging of democracy with a remarkably honest and transparent election, and the removal from public office of the worst President of the United States we have ever had in the history of the republic, Donald J. Trump and his sycophantic Vice-President.  I give thanks to the election inspectors and the tireless Postal Service for the extra effort. I write these words, some 18 days since the election became apparent in Biden’s favor and taking note that Trump has not yet conceded.  In fact, his post-election behavior has been absurd and irrational, which brings me to the final thanks for this Thanksgiving—giving thanks for science.  It is science, and not politics that yields the explanation.  The science of it is that Trump is mentally ill and deteriorating while we watch. He suffers from malignant narcissism with a notable paranoia and a destructive behavior pattern. Will someone in the family please call for a psychiatrist!

      And the bullet we dodged? We dodged, in a word, a Trump dictatorship.  We dodged a “Third Term Campaign Office”. We dodged the tsunami of lies. We dodged the further dismemberment of democracy and the constitution. We dodged a Republican Party governed by fear. We dodged an EPA that would have further degraded our air and water.  We dodged a Department of Education that would have further dismembered our public-school system. We dodged an impeached president gone unconvicted by the people. We dodged a president interested in only furthering his own interests. We dodged a president that believed he was above the law. We dodged an administration that would not regard the survival of mankind on this planet as any kind of an objective.

     So, I am celebrating Thanksgiving.  Yes Sir! I may even have a martini.

    

                                              Why Did It Take So Long?

     Within a few weeks now of the presidential election, David Gergen on CNN finally said of President Donald Trump, “We are in the grip of a madman”.  Why did it take so long?  Why is it so meaningful?  The answer to the first question is simple, and to the second complex.

     It took so long because the Corona virus pandemic has been so overwhelming and the politicization of the science of the response has been so confusing to the public.  The irrationality of the leadership during this national tragedy been slow to emerge as an underlying contribution to the fact that after eight months of near, the virus is again out of control.  In the presence of such economic stress, the people can be excused for being slow in questioning the mental status of their leader.  Now it is out in the open and grounds for discussion. 

     As to why it is meaningful to understand this situation prior to the date of final voting is the fact that if elected, we the people will have to deal with the diagnosis of madness for a second term.  To understand the situation now is to understand that the president is and has been suffering from a mental disorder called malignant or grandiose narcissism for a long time.  Narcissism, according to the abstract noted below, identifies people who display grandiosity of behavior, overconfidence, risk taking, an inflated view of one’s abilities, and a sense of entitlement, low social empathy, impulsiveness, and a willingness and ability to use others to achieve their own self-interest. And why is that important?  It is important because one of the facts that science tells us is that this condition is characterized by chronic faulty decision-making. That’s right! Along with the other requirements for making a diagnosis, the ability for making rational and correct decisions is impaired.

     This recent information does not come from the psychiatric literature. No, it comes from the business world, specifically in a publication by the Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, authored by Charles A. O’Reilly, Professor of Management and co-author Nicholas Hall, Associate Director of the Graduate School of Business Behavioral Lab.  The paper published August 14 of this year is entitled, “Grandiose Narcissists and Decision Making: Impulsive, Overconfident, and Skeptical of Experts—but Seldon in Doubt,” published on line by Elsevier Public Health Emergency Collection [a Public Health Emergency COVID 19 Initiative].  The abstract of this paper states that the condition results in “a high likelihood of the grandiose narcissist as one who is overly confident and convinced that they are special and better than others”.  In addition, after getting the wrong answer, “grandiose narcissists are more likely to blame others and remain self-confident in their judgment.” 

      The paper goes on to conclude that, “the grandiose narcissist is convinced that they are specially more creative, competent and intelligent”: that, “they are more likely to manipulate others even lying, cheating, and stealing”: and, “Research has shown that because they often feel that they are not being recognized as superior, grandiose narcissists often respond with hostility.  In addition, “grandiose or malignant narcissists have been shown to make choices more quickly than non-narcissists and that this behavior can provide short-term benefits but lead to negative long-term outcomes.  Finally, Professor O’Reilly’s paper adds that New York Times journalists have noted Trump’s profound need for personal praise, the propensity to blame others, the penchant for rewriting history, the lack of human empathy, the distortion of facts, and the impatience with scrutiny or criticism, but in my opinion, it doesn’t seem to have acquired much traction.

      Yes, Mr. Gergen, Donald Trump is a madman-- specifically a sick grandiose narcissist who should not be President of the United States or any other organization.  How crazy and ironic it is that it has taken science from a business school, not a medical school to clear the air.  

 

What is the Upcoming Presidential Election All About?

 

What is the Upcoming Presidential Election All About?

     The answer is simple and clear.  The presidential election on November 3, 2020 concerns the completion of the impeachment trial of president Donald Trump by the US Senate.  The majority of the republican members of the Senate dodged their responsibilities by hiding behind a statement of Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee who said, “The question then is not whether the president did it, but whether the United States Senate or the American people should decide what to do about what he did. I believe that the Constitution provides that the people should make that decision in the presidential election. …Our founding documents provide for duly elected presidents who serve with ‘the consent of the governed,’ not at the pleasure of the United States Congress. Let the people decide.”    

     There is little to gain debating the faulty reasoning of the honorable senator, or questioning the lack of logic in his interpretation of the Constitution regarding the intentions of the founders.  The bold fact is that except for the courageous vote by Senator Mitt Romney, the Senate Republican majority left the final decision to the electorate this November.  By default, therefore, every voter must, if not place the issue at the top of their considerations, at least not forget this responsibility and include the decision in their deliberations regardless of party affiliation amid the smoke and fog of this particular election in the midst of a world pandemic.

     I have not heard, nor seen a single word, as to whether the electorate will consider this question of guilt or innocence of the charges when voting this fall.  Nothing. Nada!   But that is not the only tragedy resulting from the cowardice of the Republican majority in the Senate trial.   Nothing was said of the possibility of the election being anything but honest and fair. Nothing.  Nada!  The alarming fact is that the same Republican party is working day and night to disrupt this election, tampering with the rules, and without any evidence declaring that the postal system will be unable to manage the necessary added burden that voting by mail will inflict.  Rather than providing extra funds and personnel for the states in most need in the face of a pandemic, and doing everything possible to solve any extra stress on the system, the President of the United States has named Louis DeJoy Postmaster General, a mega contributor to Trump, who will do all in his power to see the system does not work.

     An editorial in the New York Times today [August 20,2020], outlines what President Trump intends to do on election night, if ahead in the count by virtue of early voting booth results. “First, he will claim victory. Then, having spent most of the year denouncing vote-by-mail as corrupt, fraudulent and prone to abuse, he’ll demand that authorities stop counting mail-in and absentee ballots.  He’ll have teams of lawyers challenging counts and ballots across the country.” In summary, “A key element of Trump’s strategy is to undermine the Postal Service’s ability to deliver and collect mail.” Chaos follows.

     What will Lamar Alexander do about that?  What about messing with the consent of the governed?

 

Anti-science, Anti-life and My Vote

Anti-science, Anti-life and My Vote

     Time magazine reported that in May 2018, a year and a half before the coronavirus began in Wuhan, China, President Trump authorized his national security adviser, John Bolton, to eliminate the National Security Council’s (NSC) global health security unit and demote its pandemic experts.  This unit or council was focused on pandemic preparedness.  Bolton claims that he simply reorganized the NSC and it did not impair country’s bio defenses.  Bolton is a Trumpster, so I will leave it there except to say that after this pandemic is over, the Congress should hold hearings and get to the truth because, Dr. Anthony Faucci told the present Congress that, “It would be nice if the office were still there.” Let me put words in his mouth, “If it was still there, we would be better prepared”.

      The Center for Strategic & International studies [CSIS] a respected think tank in the US, sponsored a two-year commission, which just a month before coronavirus was reported in China, rang the “now hear this warning”, and recommended the White House restore health security leadership at the NSC.  In short, the seven recommendations were a response to the conclusion that we are not prepared for a global pandemic.  Despite the fact that this distinguished CSIS Commission on Strengthening America’s Health Security included six members of Congress, health experts, and US government and military officials it was ignored by the Trump administration.   The CSIS Commission included Kelly Ayotte, former Senator (R-NH) who had chaired the Armed Services subcommittee on Readiness, Julie Gerberding, MD.,MPH and former president of Merck Vaccines, Congressman Ami Bera (D-CA), who  before being elected to Congress practiced medicine, served as Chief Medical  Officer for Sacramento County, and taught medicine at the University of California, Davis.  Also, Ambassador Mark Dybul, faculty director of the Center for Global Health and Quality at Georgetown University Medical Center, and Admiral Jonathan Greenert, former US Navy and Chair of the National Security Studies at the National Bureau of Asian Research; plus Christine  Wormuth, director of the International Security and Defense Policy Center at RAND Corporation,  to name just a few. [see healthsecuritiy.csis.org/members/] for complete list of outstanding experts.

     Worst of all, President Trump continues to mislead the public by discrediting the scientists.  Epidemiologists stress that social distancing is critical in saving lives by slowing the transmission of the virus, and that such measures must be in place for weeks to show results.  Trump tweets that, “We cannot let the cure be worse than the disease”. Perhaps he doesn’t even believe that white lives matter.  Meanwhile, outbreak information from New York City shows accelerating increase in cases and hospital beds being hastily dispersed at the Javits Convention Center and naval hospital ships rushing to both coasts to add a thousand beds each.

      My conclusion: I am voting for Joe Biden.  He was a Boy Scout and knows what being prepared is all about.

March 25, 2020