Tag Archives: Politics

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

No category
Alexandria Ocasio Cortez being sworn in as a Representative in the House, 6 years ago.…A Getty Image

Nobody ever wins the first time they run for office. Nobody’s ever supposed to win their first bid for office. Nobody’s ever supposed to win without taking lobbyists’ money. No one’s ever supposed to defeat an incumbent. No one’s ever supposed to run a grassroots campaign without running any ads on television. We did all of those things. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

I’m not running “from the left.” I’m running from the bottom. I’m running in fierce advocacy of working-class Americans. A Tweet by Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio Cortez after being elected as the youngest woman ever elected to Congress at 29.

There is no reason to be ashamed or embarrassed. Mocking lower incomes is exactly how those who benefit from + promote wealth inequality the most keep everyday people silent about one of the worst threats to American society: that the rich are getting richer and the poor, poorer. A tweet by Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio Cortez in response to a tweeted criticism of her inability to afford an apartment in Washington DC when she first moved there in 2019.

I so want to write about Trump’s tariff threats or his bragging about his malicious immigration policies, or his giving everybody in the government a bonus if they quit. But what good does that do to anybody? I don’t know anything about tariffs except what I read in the New York Times or the Washington Post, and I’m not sure they really know anything about tariffs either. What I do know – or remember, at least – is that both papers got hysterical when Trump put tariffs on Chinese imports in 2017 and then didn’t even bother to mention it when President Biden continued them in 2021.

With Trump, like almost everything he does, tariffs seem to be a way to fill the public communication space. Trump says something seemingly outrageous about tariffs, and then the mainstream media reacts by telling us that what Trump said about tariffs is outrageous. Then we’re all talking about Trump and how outrageous he is. But, and it is a big but, while the papers say that Trump is acting outrageously over tariffs, other news, often more critical, is pushed to the back page where, especially today in the new media environment, it is ignored.

As an aside, one of the things pushed to the back pages is how Trump fills the communication space – or flooding the zone – and how the mainstream media helps him with constant attention. End aside.

We are in a new media environment, and Trump is one of the few people who understand how to prosper in that environment. Most of the Democrats, maybe all of them except about eight, are still following the old rule book. Look good, and don’t say anything controversial. Think about it, then think about it again. It is better not to be seen than being seen in the wrong place or saying something controversial. It was better to move cautiously. .

Ok, now that I’ve gotten that off my chest, I want to write about Alexandria Ocasio Cortez. What I really want to write about is that I think AOC will be our first female President. I’ve been thinking this for a long time, and then I thought I was wrong because I thought Vice President Harris would win. And I thought the Vice President had an excellent chance, too. I still think she could have won, but she lost her nerve and started playing it safe. Playing it safe is what the Democratic establishment wanted her to do, but when running against Trump in 2024, playing it safe is a losing strategy.

Playing it safe is not something that New York Representative Alexandria Ocasio Cortez does. She started her political career in 2018 by running against Joseph Crowley, who, according to the New York Times, was once seen as a possible successor to Nancy Pelosi because his seat was so safe.

I don’t know when I first became aware of Alexandria Ocasio Cortez or even why, but it was after she was elected and before she became AOC. I fell in love with her as a politician immediately, and I mean politician in the best possible sense, in a politics as public service way. The only two other times I have felt that way were with Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama. I was sure that Carter and Obama would both become president even when all the evidence said they wouldn’t be. I feel the same way about AOC.

Our politics is changing because our media is changing. The old politics, the pre-2016 politics, television politics, rewarded looking professional and not making waves. That politics required immense amounts of money and rewarded non-controversial positions. Everything was well thought out, which made for slow reactions.

The new politics, the post-2016 politics, the internet politics, rewards being seen, being everywhere, filling the news space, getting attention, and it rewards authenticity. In this new political space, exposure is everything. In the television world, Harris’es handlers didn’t want her to go on FOX News, but in the post-2016 world, that just seems crazy. Trump is a master of the post-2016 political space. He is everywhere. When the Democrats come back at him for, say, renaming Denali National Park, they help Trump in two ways: they keep Trump’s name in the center of the political space, and they answer two days later, which is two days after Trump has moved on. They seem behind the times (and they are).

I’m sure that some Democrats understand the new media landscape, but most don’t. Watching Minority Leader Schumer rebutting Trump’s 25% tariff on anything from Mexico while holding an avocado like it was going to bite him was embarrassing. And then he said that the tariff would raise the price of our Super Bowl Quack. Why did he get the job of rebutting? Not because he was good at presenting a case but because he was the senior Democrat. Meanwhile, Trump had moved on to turning Gaza into a resort after the pesky Palestinians moved to Eygpt.

Of those few Democrats who do understand the new world, nobody is better at communication than AOC. Even her tag, a very recognizable AOC, which she got very early in her political career – before she took office. shows her awareness of the power of Social Media. She is sincere, not afraid to be unabashedly herself, and relatable. She is both staggeringly young and staggeringly self-confident.

Don’t take my word for it; watch the video below. It’s long but worth it (if you are into this kind of thing and, maybe, even if you are not).

‪‬

Well, Shit

Politics, Psychological Musings

Populist Revolt Against Elite’s Vision of the U.S. New York Times

Not really a big surprise, still a big shock. It’s very likely not as bleak as it looks this morning.

It’s probably going to be a little worse if you are Jewish, or Muslim, or undocumented, or a woman, or anything but white European male, for that matter. The white male hierarchy – and it must be larger than I imagined from the viewpoint deep in my little bubble – will have more legitimacy.

The very rich will do better, NATO and Ukraine worse, but in our day-to-day lives, we (Michele and myself and most people we know) probably won’t notice much change .

Israel: AI, The Vice-Presidential Debate, and Territory

Psychological Musings

The spirits that I summoned, I now cannot rid myself of again. Johann Wolfgang von Goeth in The Sorcerer’s Apprentice, as quoted by Yuval Noel Harari in Nexus.

The dog barking at you from behind his master’s fence acts for a motive indistinguishable from that of his master when the fence was built; essentially, they both see the area as their territory and are protecting it, even if the dog doesn’t fully understand the concept of ownership like the human does. Robert Ardrey in The Territorial Imperative: A Personal Inquiry Into the Animal Origins of Property and Nations (1966)

A place belongs forever to whoever claims it hardest, remembers it most obsessively, wrenches it from itself, shapes it, renders it, loves it so radically that he remakes it in his image. Joan Didion in The White Album (1979)

Michele and I watched the VP debate last Wednesday. I know the debate was on Tuesday, but we had long-standing plans to see Yuval Noel Harari. I’m a big fan of Harari, though, to be accurate, I should really say that I am a big fan of Sapiens, Harari’s first book (I did not get through his second book).

Harari has a new book out, as do many of the other speakers in the same series of talks, and I think that is largely the reason for his being on the speaker tour. The book is Nexus, subtitled A Brief History of Information Networks from the Stone Age to AI, and, from his talk, the book sounds interesting, if not very optimistic. One thing that Harari said that was both interesting and frightening is that Israel is using AI to pick targets in their wholesale killing of the indigenous Palestinians (I keep reading that it is called the Israeli-Palestinian War, but with the overwhelming superiority of the Israeli weapons, and an estimated death toll of about 1,706 Israelis to 41,431 Palestinians this fight can not be called a war). Harari pointed out that humans still pull the trigger, but only after AI tells them where to shoot. He did not say it like it was a good thing.

Watching the debate the next day, after reading the reviews, so to speak, was more like doing homework than “Oh boy! Let’s watch the debate”. Vance was very polished and has the ability to make some of his and Trump’s crazy ideas seem almost normal. It seems obvious to me that Vance has done a lot of debating. I kept thinking, Hum, I guess the elite schools are better; Yale, Vance’s alma mater, is better, at least in preparing people for debates, than Chadron State College, Walz’s alma mater.

The first question was something like, “Governor Walz, if it was up to you, would you support or discourage an Israeli preemptive strike on Iran?” Walz didn’t answer the question, saying instead that Hamas attacked first and that Israel has the right to defend itself, and Vice President Harris will provide steady leadership. I understand the Harris/Walz Campaign’s problem here; the Jewish population is a big demographic and a bigger donor pool. On the other side, Michigan and Minnesota, which are both swing states and could go either way, have a lot of Muslim voters, which the party does not want to lose.

Next, one of the moderators asked Vance the same question. The Republicans have a different problem; they lost most of the Muslim vote after President George W. Bush senselessly attacked Iraq (before Bush’s attack, a plurality of Muslims, who are pretty socially conservative, voted Republican). Vance, who is new to the national scene but already disliked for some of his past comments like, “Cat ladies are unhappy and trying to make everybody else miserable.”, said, “I want to answer your question, but, first, let me tell you about myself.” He came across as a nice, reasonable guy. At the very end, he said something to the effect that Israel can do whatever they want. I started to worry that this would be a bad day for the Democrats. Still, as the debate went on, Vance seemed to misrepresent various Republican and Democratic positions and, in the end, refused even to admit that Trump lost the 2020 election, leaving me feeling better. 

In the background, the threat of war in the Middle East is ramping up, and Israel is increasingly seen as the bad guy, which, in my opinion, it is. That’s not good. Not good for Israel or for Jewish people around the world who are mistakenly tarred with the same brush as Israelis. I say mistakenly because Jewish people who were born and live outside Israel and Israelis are not interchangeable, and many Jewish people, especially younger Jewish people who consider Israel the dominant power in the region, think the Israeli government is in the wrong.

I’ve been interested in human evolution for a long time, probably since 1966, when I first read The Territorial Imperative: A Personal Inquiry Into the Animal Origins of Property and Nations by Robert Ardrey. Robert Ardrey was not a scientist; he was a playwright and a screenwriter who was also interested in human evolution and became a science writer. He was a very controversial science writer in 1966, but most of what was then controversial, like humans evolved in Africa and not Asia, is now considered obvious. Ardrey also wrote that we evolved from animals and were still, in large part, run by our animal roots when the prevailing wisdom was that animals acted out of instinct, and we were different because we acted through our power of reasoning (which, of course, animals didn’t have).

Ardrey postulated that one of the instincts that we are controlled by is our animal instinct to acquire land and defend territory. He further postulated that the Nazis were able to round up and slaughter the Jews because they did not have any territory to defend, and if they did own territory, they would have fought back.

Now, both Israelis and Palestinians think that the land between the Dead Sea and the Mediterranean is theirs, exclusively theirs, and both are willing to fight to the death to keep it. I think that it is a problem without a solution. One of my many doctors is an Israeli who moved here from Israel because she did not want to raise her children in a country that treated the Palestinians so cruelly. Off and on, when I have an appointment with her, we end up talking about Israel and Palestine, although neither one of us has a solution.

On one of those visits, I suggested that the only solution was for the Israeli people and the Palestinian people to learn to live together in a single state. She snapped back, “No way, we would never let that happen.” It was the most animated I’ve ever seen her. Much more animated than either Vance or Walz in the aforementioned Vice Presidential Debate.

That debate was, for the most part, a civil, lowkey affair. I don’t mean that as a compliment. It would be a compliment if Senator Vance or Governor Walz actually debated their different takes on the issues, but they didn’t. Both debaters were excellent at not answering the questions, although Walz did it better. I think Vance hurt himself when he started, several times, with, “I don’t want to talk about the past, I want to talk about  the future.” Maybe, in the end, that is the good thing about AI. I read that different AI programs make up answers – called hallucinating in the trade – but they haven’t yet learned to equivocate. 

The Presidential Debate and Neoteny

Uncategorized
Otters frolicking in the sand.

Neoteny is the retention of the juvenile features in an adult animal. Genetic factors influence the degree of neoteny in individuals. Neoteny is manifested both behaviorally and physically. Temple Grandin, Mark J. Deesing, in Genetics and the Behavior of Domestic Animals.

On the one hand, I am convinced that man owes the life-long persistence of his constitutive curiosity and explorative playfulness to partial neoteny that is indubitably a consequence of domestication. … On the other hand, domestication is apt to cause an equally alarming disintegration of valuable behavioral traits and an equally alarming exaggeration of less desirable ones. Conrad Lorenz in the forward to The Wild Canids.

Debating is all about dominance, and Vice President Kamala Harris dominated former President Donald Trump in last Tuesday’s debate. She doesn’t want to come across as an Angry Black Woman, but she can’t look weak; that’s a pretty narrow path to follow, and, after a shaky start, she pulled it off. Somebody with a much better political memory than I have said it was the first time anybody beat Trump in a debate.

When I repeated that to some friends on a Zoom call, they all said I was wrong, insisting Hillary won in 2016 and Biden won in 2020. That’s not how I remember it, so I listened to the second of three debates between Trump and Clinton. Ok, I didn’t listen to the entire debate – I’m not that much of a masochist – but I did listen to the first third. What I came away with was not so much about who the clear winner was but the impression that Donald Trump was way more coherent eight years ago. He was a much more formidable candidate then.

What I thought this blog was going to be about was neoteny and how it fits into Donald Trump’s persona, but I believe now that the most noticeable thing about Trump is his deterioration. Sure, he is an adult who acts like a three-year-old – a bad-mannered three-year-old who acts in a way most people would not want their three-year-old child to act like – but that is not as noticeable as the deterioration happening in front of us.

We are born, we grow up, and we – eventually – die. However, it is not a linear process. The change a human goes through in their first fifteen or twenty years is dramatic, and I believe the same sort of dramatic change takes place during the last fifteen or twenty years of our lives. We are comparatively stable during what I would call our middle years. Comparatively, the change that occurs in us at thirty to forty-five – or even forty-five to sixty – is pretty minor. But Trump is past those relatively stable years – stable not being a descriptor I would not normally use to describe Trump – and rapidly falling apart on live TV. If he were to win, I imagine that decline would on accelerate. That’s pretty scary.

I’m Shocked, But Not Surprised

Uncategorized

Mr. Trump now leads Mr. Biden 49 percent to 43 percent among likely voters nationally, a three-point swing toward the Republican from just a week earlier, before the debate. Nate Cohen in the New York Times.

Democrats have had the tendency to think, ‘Well, we owe it to the person. They’ve been good to the party, they’ve fought for the right causes over the years. Therefore, it’s kind of up to them to decide when to step aside.” Eric Schickler, co-director of the Institute of Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley.

Michele and I didn’t see The Great Debate Disaster – we were driving to her family cabin in what is now known as Olympic Valley – although we did listen to the debate on the car radio. Well, we listened to parts of the debate anyway. After Biden or Trump would say something, I would turn the radio off, saying, “I can’t listen to this.” Thirty seconds later, in a FOMO frenzy of thinking Biden had to improve, we would turn it back on, listen for ten or fifteen minutes, and then repeat the cycle. It was painful.

I thought Maybe Biden did better on TV, where people could see how much better and more Presidential he looked. However, by every account I’ve read, Biden looked even worse on TV. Part of the problem is that Biden is not a very good campaigner. According to President Biden’s campaign team, part of the problem was that Biden had jet lag from going to Normandy to celebrate D-Day, and part of it was that he had a cold. It’s safe to say that whoever made the deal with former president Trump’s campaign team wasn’t thinking it out. And Biden surely signed off on the debate date which doesn’t speak very well for him.

Actually, President Biden running for a second term does not speak well for him. I say that even though I believe that President Biden had a great first term with a long list of accomplishments like the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law – which, somehow, was a bill that everybody wanted but nobody could get passed – $280B to bring very high tech chip manufacturing back to the United States, and he got the Respect for Marriage Act through Congress which codified marriage equality for same-sex and interracial couples. For me, most importantly, he actually acknowledged that Climate Change was real and started doing something about it with the infrastructure law and the Build Back Better Act. However, all these bills were passed in the first half of Biden’s term, while the second two years were much less impressive.  

I think Biden should withdraw from running for president because he is too old to effectively run for office or effectively run the office – as far as that goes, and he is getting worse. I also believe he is unlikely to stop running. That’s too bad for everyone concerned: President Biden, the Democrats, and, especially, the people of the United States.

Now that I’ve said that, I want to reference a couple of similar situations that suggest I’m wrong. Running for his second term, President Ronald Reagan lost the first debate to former Vice-president Walter Mondale and went on to win the second debate and the presidency. President Johnson had a great first term – a great 1.5 terms? – and then withdrew from running after a poor showing in the New Hampshire primary. Vice-president Hubert Humphrey won the nomination at the 1968 Convention in Chicago and went on to lose the election.

I do want to point out that six years after leaving office, Ronald Reagan made public that he had Alzheimer’s Disease. What he did not say was that he probably had the beginnings of Alzheimer’s during his second term in office, and it probably contributed to his second term being non-productive. I also want to point out that the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago was chaotic, and Johnson would have surely lost if he had run.