Tuesday, December 13, 2016

are we in peak 'Depression' yet, or still 'Bargaining'?

Traditionally, it's:
  1. Denial – The first reaction is denial. In this stage individuals believe the diagnosis is somehow mistaken, and cling to a false, preferable reality.
  2. Anger – When the individual recognizes that denial cannot continue, they become frustrated, especially at proximate individuals. Certain psychological responses of a person undergoing this phase would be: "Why me? It's not fair!"; "How can this happen to me?"; "Who is to blame?"; "Why would this happen?".
  3. Bargaining – The third stage involves the hope that the individual can avoid a cause of grief. Usually, the negotiation for an extended life is made in exchange for a reformed lifestyle. People facing less serious trauma can bargain or seek compromise.
  4. Depression – "I'm so sad, why bother with anything?"; "I'm going to die soon, so what's the point?"; "I miss my loved one, why go on?"
    During the fourth stage, the individual despairs at the recognition of their mortality. In this state, the individual may become silent, refuse visitors and spend much of the time mournful and sullen.
  5. Acceptance – "It's going to be okay."; "I can't fight it; I may as well prepare for it."
    In this last stage, individuals embrace mortality or inevitable future, or that of a loved one, or other tragic event. People dying may precede the survivors in this state, which typically comes with a calm, retrospective view for the individual, and a stable condition of emotions.
I have been firmly in 'Depression' since the 'election'. I don't even remember passing thru 'Bargaining', but that's where I am this morning, and thinking about Abraham's tweets with God, prior to the destruction of Sodom.

You may recall that God laid out his plan to destroy Sodom, but Abraham proposes to God that the city should be saved if 50 righteous men (sorry, no women got to vote on this, times being what they were) can be located.

Over the subsequent verses, Abraham, practicing the art of the deal (sic), bargains down until he finally gets God to agree to forestall destruction if 10 can be found. 

Here's the bargain I am looking for: if there is even ONE Elector in each of the States that voted for You-Know-Who, who has the moral courage to simply cast an 'Abstain' vote, that will reduce the tally to under 270 and, at least, apply an Emergency Brake on this runaway train.

We can worry about the House of Representatives (sic) after that.

So, would it be too much to ask citizens of the Trump states, who might have some doubts as to the current trajectory, to please find out where in your state your Electors are meeting on December 19th, and shout loudly enough so they can hear you?  Remember, we only need to reach 1 Elector in each Red state.

Before I go, let me take another look at those Bible verses to find out what happened to Sodom....

Oh, crap.

Sunday, December 11, 2016

you're invited to my party

OK, it's come down to this.

Given the increasing evidence of Russian meddling, the long-recognized Russian entanglements among many of the Trump insiders, the astonishing cravenness of the Cabinet appointments (Exxon Mobile CEO as Secretary of State? Can you say 'Oil-igarchy'?), and, ultimately, the preposterous reality of the President-Elect (shudder) himself, I believe it's time for a 'what side are you on' moment.

A certain number of elected Congressfolk are well and truly alarmed at the rot that this 'election' has wrought.  And exposed.

I know that the few vocal Republicans, who understand what these developments mean for the American Republic, will never cross-over to declare themselves Democrats, to counter the 'Freedom Caucus' troglodytes.

Therefore, I proclaim that it's now time for a new coalition to form (yes, it will be predominantly Democrats, excluding Joe Manchin), of statespeople who understand the abyss we are hurtling towards (gas-pedal brought to you by Exxon Mobile and Koch Industries).

I don't even care if you call it the 'Patriot Party' or some such nonsense.  I don't care if you put John McCain and Lindsay Graham as its leaders.  I don't care if they call it the 'New Republicans'.

All that is important is that it has enough members in both Houses (heck, I'd settle ONLY for the Senate), to constitute a movement that the Media will HAVE to explain as 'people of American principles, dedicated to stopping a runaway train'.

By the way, if this results in the disintegration of one or both of the existing Major Parties, I'm willing to live with that.  Yes, I know all about the 'Law of Unintended Consequences'.

To continue on the current course, I believe, is Social Suicide.

Gaia also would say 'thanks - what took you so long?'.

Just a thought...

Saturday, December 10, 2016

whole lot of Pokin' going on

For the sake of propriety, let me substitute the more-refined notion of a 'Poke in the Eye' for the common gesture of a raised middle-finger.  Therefore, I trust nobody will be offended as I shorten that to 'Poke You'.

That being said...

We live in a world of 'Poke You'.  At some level, this sentiment has governed human interactions forever, but  I see it everywhere this season.  Here are a few prime examples:

I think it was Michael Moore who summed up the now-legendary blue-collar-rust-belt vote as a giant 'Poke You' to the 'East Coast Elites'.

The joke there, is that Mr. Trump, by making clear he has no intention of jailing Hillary, deporting all Muslims, repealing the entire ACA, (in short, much of the campaign red-meat), has done a fairly significant 'Poke You' to his own electorate. (Many, sadly, are yet to realize this, but I digress.)

Similarly, His cabinet nominations are a giant 'Poke You' to the Progressives, who are aghast at who is tapped to lead Defense, Treasury, Education, HUD, Labor and, especially, the EPA.  Our eyes have been well and thoroughly poked.

Now we hear that Congressional leaders knew about Russian meddling back in September, and that the President wanted this exposed in a show of bipartisan outrage, but Senator "Turtle-boy" McConnell refused to go along, giving Obama a major 'Poke You' (for which, and other services rendered, he was rewarded by his wife getting a  Cabinet position). This actually doubles the essential Pokiness - well-played, sir.

But wait, there's much more.  This morning I hear that, in Michigan, the Trump campaign (October rallying cry: 'the election is rigged!!') got three Republican-appointed judges to vote against two Democrat-appointed judges, to halt the vote recount.  So these judges, whose mission is to essentially protect the integrity and respect for our public institutions, have, by one vote (shades of Bush v. Gore) issued a giant 'Poke You' to the entire country.

So here's my modest proposal.

Since this 'tis the season for massive 'Poke You' gestures, here's an opportunity for one that will make the history books of the future (assuming, of course, that such a phrase has any meaning).  On December 19, wouldn't it be sweet if the Electoral College, on behalf of both the US Constitution AND 350 million US citizens, sends the ultimate 'Poke You' to that smug rat-fucker Vladimir Putin?

Just a thought.

Thursday, November 10, 2016

what went wrong?

Many years ago, when I was a young Programmer thrust into the role of 'Systems Analyst', I had the good fortune to share an office with an old guy (digression: now I'm the Old Guy) whose main working years predated computers.  His profession was called things like 'Operations Research'.

He was tall, white-haired, and skinny and smoked incessantly. He didn't know computers, but he knew Systems and learned quickly.  Even better, I learned a lot from him.

One of his favorite stories was when he was employed by a restaurant, to analyze why it wasn't making money.  This is what he said he learned:

In the restaurant business, you can promote your place as having either a superb atmosphere, superb food, or superb (i.e. reasonable) prices.  If you have one of those, you *may* succeed.  If you have two of those, you will probably succeed.  If you have all three of those, you *will* fail.

In the world of electing a President, you need a great candidate, a great message, and a great organization.  If you have all three, you will probably succeed.  If you have only two, you *may* succeed.  If you have only one of those, you will fail.

The Democratic Establishment had a mature organization, but they decided on the candidate before they decided on the Message.

I was at Bernie's amazing early Portland rally (28,000 wildly cheering fans).  The message was:  Income Inequality and a Rigged System, over the past 4 decades, has left much of America behind.  We all understood this, and approved of his remedies (overturn Citizens United, reign in military spending, build infrastructure, and, above all, care about the masses who have been victimized by globalization).

The Hillary people saw Bernie as an opponent to be quashed, not as a reflection of Popular Voter Sentiment.

Both the Progressive Crowd and the Rust Belt folks understood the damage done by decades of plant-closings and Wall Street shenanigans (i.e. Bernie's message), and the Rust Belt folks, who actually lived with the shattered lives, dreams, and opiates, simply don't see Gender inequality as the Big Issue This Year.

A Sociopath like Trump understood why Bernie was drawing the big crowds.  He didn't need (or even favor) Bernie's remedies.  He only needed Bernie's Message as a basis, and mixed in the usual demagogue tropes (you know what they are) to keep 'em riled.

And here we are.  Just my opinion.

Friday, October 28, 2016

who can say what's funny?

Reading about some of the apparent beliefs of the more extreme corners of the Trump-is-great crowd, I am reminded of something that occurred some years ago.  I offer this only as a personal experience.

My son, probably then in Middle School or Junior High, had some friends who got involved in a local Civil War Re-enacter group.  As a long-time student of the Civil War myself, I was interested in what went on and what the kids were being exposed to.  We had a couple of local get-togethers, where the kids made cartridges for an upcoming regional event.

We went to the event, south of Portland.  It was a lovely weekend, and was quite interesting seeing the 'camps', with their 19th Century crafts, clothing, and everyday items.  The 'battle' had the expected artillery, rifles, battle lines, and tactics (i.e. CHARGE!!).

There was lots of smoke and noise.  Can't recall which side 'won'.

At some point I was chatting with other Dads, and one of them told this joke:

Dad1:  My grandfather had a terrible experience at a Concentration Camp.

Me:  Yeah?

Dad1: Yep, he got drunk and fell out of the guard tower.

Me (thinking):  WTF?

Other dads:  Haw, haw.

We never went back to another event, so I can't claim this is indicative of the mind-set.

But it happened, and I never forgot it.

Tuesday, August 09, 2016

It-Drives-Me-Nuts Dept., revisited

Et tu, NPR?

On Morning Edition today, they were interviewing two economists (of different persuasions), to analyze Trump's recent 'economic policy (sic)' speech.  They played the quote where he said, basically, "and we're going to eliminate the Death Tax - no workers should have to pay this, after paying taxes all their lives."

And the crowd goes wild.

The economists then had a back-and-forth, treating this nonsense (intentional or ignorant?) as a serious proposition. "Well, the Estate Tax only kicks in on estates worth many millions of dollars."  "Yes, but even a small business person with two or three car dealerships would be subject to the tax."  Etc. etc. etc.

Missing the point entirely.

It would not have taken that long for someone to mention that, of course, the 'Death Tax' is another right-wing dog-whistle (see also 'partial-birth abortion') designed to inflame the uninformed. 

Considering that economists say that a major proportion of our fellow Americans couldn't find a way to cobble together a couple of thousand dollars in an emergency, I can pretty much guarantee that a major proportion of Trump's cheering crowds will never (well, maybe in their dreams) have an estate subject to the Estate Tax.

But, no, another opportunity was lost to insert Reality into what has become a non-Reality-based campaign.   Then again, maybe I'm confusing today's NPR with the NPR of Yesteryear.

But wait, there's more.

A few minutes later, in a recap of the news, they mentioned that 'two families who lost sons in (wait for it) Benghazi have filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Hillary Clinton', then moved on.

If only they could have taken 8 seconds to add, 'of course, the lawsuit was brought by Larry Klayman, the notorious right-wing hack who has been persecuting the Clintons with spurious lawsuits for decades.'

It drives me nuts.

At least, with the Romans, the masses got BOTH bread and circuses.  No bread for you!

Sunday, August 07, 2016

why do we feel bad when fictional characters die?

We are watching, on Amazon, a popular TV show that had multiple seasons.  We are currently many seasons in and 2 from the end (no more spoilers here!).

Last night, without warning, one of the main characters, who had been central to virtually every spisode from the beginning, was suddenly killed.  I found myself feeling sad, which is, on the face of it ridiculous.

There was a one-minute warning, because the camera focused briefly on a gun, and I am well aware of the theater rule that, if you show the audience a gun, it must, sooner or later, be fired.  There must be a few exceptions, but none come to mind.  Anyone?

What is it about human story-telling that makes Unexpected Death such a primary archetype?  I'm guessing that, in the days when we inhabited tree-tops above the savannah (or even among the fur-trappers of the 1820's), sudden Unexpected Death was not unusual, and feeds the human need for either catharsis (if we liked the character) or schadenfreude (otherwise).

I can only liken the stunned sensation I felt last night to reading about the hobbits trudging thru the Mines of Moria, and Gandalf suddenly disappearing into the abyss with the Balrog.  (Gandalf, if you don't know already, reappears later, so this feeds into the Resurrection archetype, which appears to have had a equally pervasive fascination, but don't get me started).

Downton Abbey had a bunch of these, too, but, aside from Sybil, I wasn't that deeply affected.

With the TV series we are following, we feel the shock and numbness that the other characters feel, and we wonder how we can go on.

Yet, we know we will go on.

The point of all this is that, in these days, Sudden Unexpected Death does NOT touch most of our lives (at least in my particular demographic - the mileage of other humans here on Earth varies considerably).  Encountering this in fiction is (Fate willing) probably the main way we will experience it.  Maybe fiction is a way of letting us know that these things happen, and gives us a model for how to continue to live.

Still, I can't help feeling that, when an author kills a character, she cannot avoid thinking, with satisfaction, "this'll make 'em squirm."

I am currently re-reading 'Hamlet' (eBook) for the first time since High School.  The author writes very well, but I sure hope nothing bad happens to ol' Hammie, since I am growing quite fond of him.