Etiquette



DP Etiquette

First rule: Don't be a jackass. Most people are good.

Other rules: Do not attack or insult people you disagree with. Engage with facts, logic and beliefs. Out of respect for others, please provide some sources for the facts and truths you rely on if you are asked for that. If emotion is getting out of hand, get it back in hand. To limit dehumanizing people, don't call people or whole groups of people disrespectful names, e.g., stupid, dumb or liar. Insulting people is counterproductive to rational discussion. Insult makes people angry and defensive. All points of view are welcome, right, center, left and elsewhere. Just disagree, but don't be belligerent or reject inconvenient facts, truths or defensible reasoning.

Sunday, March 2, 2025

SOTU...


The State of the “Union” (oxymoron) address to the nation is coming up Tuesday night in the U.S.  Word has it that Trump plans to tick off all his personal and many “accomplishments” by way of his signed Executive Orders (and there’s a shitload of ‘em).  Seems like that will (or should) be a major slap-in-the-face to the Republicans sitting there looking stupid, showcasing the ineptitude of the Republican controlled congress (House and Senate).  They haven’t done anything, other than kiss the ring and play sycophants to their newly minted King.


Anyway, here’s the question:


How should the Democrats “behave” at that annual bicameral event?


  • Don’t show up?

  • Boo at everything Trump says?

  • Do a lot of rude and noisy interruptions of Trump's speech (a la Joe Wilson's "You lie!" to Obama)?

  • Stand up and turn their backs in unison on Trump, at opportune moments?

  • Be nice and polite and civil? (oh my!)

  • All wear the Ukrainian flag colors (blue and yellow) in unified democratic support? (Or maybe half Ukranian/half US flag attire?)

  • [Your suggestions here]


(by PrimalSoup)


Saturday, March 1, 2025

Fight hard as hell now, or keep your powder dry for 2026 and 2028?

My instinct is to fight hard now against each major attack that djt and MAGA elites launch against democracy, the rule law and our civil liberties. Some or maybe most people think that strategy is ineffective. Instead, we should wait to fight at major milestones, e.g., the 2026 and 2028 elections. My instinct isn't empirical analysis. So I asked for an empirical analysis.

Perplexity in deep research mode:
Q: Some Americans are torn between openly opposing Trump and MAGA authoritarianism now vs staying quiet and openly opposing in the months before the 2026 mid-term or 2028 presidential elections? Which strategy is riskier for democracy and the rule law?  

A: The United States faces an unprecedented threat to its democratic institutions, with former President Donald Trump and the MAGA movement openly embracing authoritarian tactics. This has sparked a critical debate: should pro-democracy forces oppose these threats immediately, or adopt a strategic delay until the 2026 midterms or 2028 presidential election?  

1. The Accelerating Pace of Democratic Backsliding Authoritarian movements thrive on incrementalism. Once in power, they exploit institutional weaknesses, rewrite rules, and normalize breaches of democratic norms. Research on competitive authoritarian regimes demonstrates that delays in opposition allow incumbents to capture key institutions—judiciaries, electoral systems, and media—thereby tilting the playing field irreversibly ( ). For instance, Hungary’s Viktor Orbán consolidated power by gradually dismantling checks on executive authority over a decade, rendering subsequent opposition efforts ineffective ( ).  In the U.S., Trump’s second-term agenda includes purging nonpartisan civil servants, weaponizing the Justice Department against critics, and expanding unilateral executive powers through untested legal theories ( ). These actions, if unchallenged, could institutionalize authoritarian governance long before 2026. As the Carnegie Endowment notes, oppositions that wait until backsliding becomes severe face dramatically reduced odds of success—winning only 13% of elections in contexts where liberal democracy scores fall below 0.50 ().  

2. The Closing Window for Legal and Institutional Resistance Immediate opposition leverages existing legal and procedural tools to slow authoritarian advances. For example, litigation against unconstitutional executive orders—such as Trump’s attempts to revoke birthright citizenship—has temporarily halted their implementation. However, courts alone cannot safeguard democracy. The judiciary’s enforcement capacity depends on executive compliance, and Trump’s allies, including Vice President JD Vance, have hinted at ignoring unfavorable rulings.  Delaying resistance risks allowing authoritarian actors to reshape the judiciary and legislative frameworks. The Heritage Foundation’s "Project 2025" blueprint aims to install MAGA loyalists across federal agencies, ensuring Trumpism outlives his presidency(). Once entrenched, these appointees could neuter oversight mechanisms, making future legal challenges futile. Historical parallels from Poland and Turkey show that delayed opposition often confronts a captured state apparatus.  

The Risks of Strategic Delay 
1. Entrenching Authoritarian Control Delaying opposition until 2026 assumes that democratic institutions will remain intact enough to facilitate a competitive election. This is a dangerous miscalculation. Authoritarian regimes methodically dismantle electoral integrity: gerrymandering, voter suppression, and disenfranchisement tactics escalate over time (). By 2026, MAGA-controlled states could certify fraudulent results under the guise of "election integrity" laws, as seen in Georgia’s 2021 voter suppression bill (https://www.brookings.edu/articles/dangerous-cracks-in-us-democracy-pillars/).  Furthermore, Trump’s proposed Schedule F executive order would reclassify 50,000 federal workers as political appointees, enabling a loyalist bureaucracy to manipulate future elections10. Once implemented, reversing such measures requires winning power in a system skewed against dissent—a near-impossible task.  

2. Erosion of Collective Action Capacity Opposition movements require time to organize, fundraise, and build coalitions. Delaying resistance until 2026 risks fracturing pro-democracy forces, as activists lose momentum and donors shift focus. The 2022 IPU report on democratic threats emphasizes that disengagement and polarization—key authoritarian tools—accelerate when citizens perceive resistance as futile.  Psychological studies of authoritarianism also highlight the "spiral of silence," where individuals self-censor dissent if they believe their views are unpopular. Immediate opposition counters this by demonstrating widespread resistance, whereas delay reinforces perceptions of inevitability.  

Comparative Risk Analysis 
1. Immediate Resistance: Risks of Escalation Opposing MAGA authoritarianism now carries risks of violent backlash, legal persecution, and short-term democratic instability. Trump has already incited violence against perceived enemies, and his allies in Congress have threatened to investigate pro-democracy NGOs1920. However, these risks are mitigated by the U.S.’s strong civil society, independent media, and federalist structure. States like California and New York can serve as counterweights to federal authoritarianism ( ).  

2. Strategic Delay: Risks of Irreversible Damage Waiting until 2026 risks allowing MAGA to consolidate control over the judiciary, electoral systems, and bureaucracy. By then, legal challenges may lack enforceability, protests could face militarized suppression, and elections might no longer reflect popular will. The Brookings Institution warns that delaying opposition in backsliding democracies reduces the likelihood of reversing authoritarianism by 50–70% ().  

Conclusion: The Necessity of Immediate, Multifaceted Resistance The gravest risk to U.S. democracy lies in underestimating the speed and ruthlessness of authoritarian consolidation. Historical precedents—from Hungary to Venezuela—demonstrate that delayed opposition confronts a captured state, rigged elections, and a demoralized populace. While immediate resistance risks short-term instability, it preserves the legal, institutional, and societal tools necessary for long-term democratic survival.  

Pro-democracy actors must adopt a three-pronged strategy: Legal and Legislative Pushback: Challenge unconstitutional actions in court while pressuring GOP defectors to uphold institutional norms.  

Grassroots Mobilization: Sustain protests, strikes, and voter registration drives to maintain public engagement. 

 Coalition Building: Forge alliances between progressives, moderate conservatives, and business leaders to isolate MAGA extremists.  The 2024–2028 period is not a conventional political cycle but a battle for democracy’s survival. As Protect Democracy’s analysis concludes, "Closing civic space doesn’t always look like tanks in Tiananmen Square...it begins with small precedents that add up". The time to resist is now.
I agree with that analysis. Fight now or maybe forever lose your ability to fight, your democracy and your liberties.

Thoughts about the Ukraine and democracy?

Several news sources suggested that yesterday's meeting between Zelenski and djt probably was a MAGA setup staged to make Zelensky look as bad as possible, while making Russia look good. In my opinion, it was more evidence that djt and MAGA oppose democracy. djt's known pro-Russia and pro-authoritarian sympathies, and the subsequent reactions from both U.S. and Russian officials suggest that the meeting was conducive to making Zelenskyy look bad, while Russia would look better than it really is. The public nature of the confrontation, the harsh criticisms, and the implications for U.S.-Ukraine relations all contribute to this being a MAGA setup.

On 11/6/24, I posted this prediction: The Ukraine will fall to Putin and his brutal vengeance. The slaughter will be savage. All global democracies will be under increasingly intense pressure to go authoritarian. The last stand for global democracy will be Europe's democracies, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and little or nothing else. 
 
Seems like things are on track to make most or all of that true. Maybe one could even say that as of now, the slaughter in the Ukraine already has been savage. 


The AtlanticIt Was an Ambush -- Friday marked one of the grimmest days in the history of American diplomacy.

The NationThe Most Disgraceful Foreign Policy Spectacle in US History -- Donald Trump and JD Vance tried to humiliate Volodymyr Zelensky on Friday with the whole world watching

Esquire: President Trump Embarrassed Himself, the Nation, and Every Thinking Human on Earth -- In the Oval Office on Friday, Donald Trump and JD Vance behaved like angry children. Volodymyr Zelenskyy acted like a man.

Friday, February 28, 2025

MAGA's lies (a/k/a "alternate realities")

ABSTRACT: Growing concern has been expressed that we have entered a “post-truth” era in which each of us willfully believes whatever we choose, aided and abetted by alternative and social media that spin alternative realities [lies and falsehoods] for boutique consumption. A prime example of the belief in alternative realities is said to be acceptance of “conspiracy theories”––a term that is often used as a pejorative to indict claims of conspiracy that are so obviously absurd that only the unhinged could believe them. The epistemological standard often involved in this indictment, however—the standard of “obvious” falsity—invites subjectivity in its application, because what is obviously false to one person can be common sense to another. This is not just a truism; considerable research suggests that people’s political beliefs, in general, and their acceptance or rejection of conspiracy theories in particular, tends in large part to be determined by partisan, ideological, and other priors. -- Joseph E. Uscinski & Adam M. Enders: What is a Conspiracy Theory and Why Does it Matter?, Critical Review: 1-22, 2022


The NPR program 1A broadcast a program yesterday about why most false conspiracy theories, mostly lies, are generally impossible to debunk. The transcript is at that link. The program was built around the toxic effects that decades of MAGA/authoritarian lies and demagoguery had on one family. Two points stand out:
  • Diligent, respectful attempts to use facts and sound reasoning to debunk false beliefs and lies that MAGA demagoguery has implanted in believer's minds almost always fails. That's the case, even if some inconvenient facts or reasoning actually sink in and are accepted. The trapped minds simply rationalize their way out of the inconvenience, i.e., cognitive dissonance.
  • A leading political scientist who studies the power of demagoguery and false beliefs, professor Joseph Uscinski, University of Miami (published research), asserts that minds trapped in false beliefs and lies cannot accept contradictory facts and reasoning because their identities are threatened too much. Most people's identities are built over decades. Changing that in a short period of time is usually impossible for most people. Changing a mind about one crackpot or blatantly false thing is a hopeless game of whack-a-mole.
A mentally trapped MAGA father confidently made a $10,000 bet with his non-MAGA son that all of these crackpot but fairly common MAGA conspiracy theory predictions would be true by the end of 2024: 

1. Obama will be convicted of treason by a court.
2. Biden will be convicted of treason by a court.
3. Nancy Pelosi will be convicted of treason by a court.
4. Bill Clinton would be convicted of treason and murder by a court. 
5. Hillary Clinton would be convicted of treason and murder by a court. 
6. djt would be reinstated as president without an election and cleared of all charges.
7. Biden would be removed from office.
8. The governor of New York would be removed from office. 
9. The mayor of New York would be removed from office.
10. The entire US will come under martial law because of mass rioting and chaos, with the US military having to step in to quell the violence.

Once it turned out that none of the predictions came to pass, the MAGA dad wanted to do another big bet on another round of crackpot MAGA conspiracy theories. MAGA has an endless supply of 'em, hence whack-a-mole. The dad simply rationalized all the failed predictions into irrelevance.

That is the reality that MAGA demagoguery and susceptible minds see and sincerely believe to be true. Those minds cannot be easily changed by anything. Those people's identities are at stake.

An email to the program commented: The Internet was supposed to bring a new age of enlightenment. Its ability to put people in contact with erudite discussion and accurate information was supposed to make us all smarter. Instead, it has allowed the worst of us, the most paranoid, the most angry, the most conspiratorial to coalesce in groups online. While in totality, they remain small in numbers. They feel strong and numerous in their online conglomerates. All this while caring people retreat from the fray because they are wounded by the lack of sincere engagement and the glee with which vitriol and lies are used to further empower the worst. 

How common is this degree of deceit and self-delusion among djt voters? That's hard to tell. A 2020 Pew Research Center study found that 47% of U.S. adults had heard at least a little about QAnon, with 41% of Republicans who were aware of it viewing it as a good thing for the country. This suggests that a significant portion of Republicans are not only aware of but also receptive to false conspiracy theories. A 2021 article in Persuasion indicated that 72% of Republican voters believed there was serious fraud in the 2020 election, and a significant portion of them had favorable views about crackpot MAGA conspiracy theories, e.g., millions of illegal immigrants vote in federal elections. Published data indicates that at least one-third to over half of Republican voters hold views aligned with conspiracy theories, e.g., false belief in widespread election fraud.

MAGA tore that family apart. MAGA is not merely knowingly immoral. It is knowingly evil. Unfortunately, this kind of evil is legal. In my opinion, politicians who spew divisive, evil lies like this are unfit for office and should be impeached and removed from office.