Two Very Different, Unrelated Things: Phronesis and Roger Stone

Phronesis

A long time critic came across this word this morning and thought it applied to my political ideology and interest in a 3rd political party. Early on, he referred to what I wanted as the PPs, which came from a now-extinct blog I ran for years called the Pragmatic Caucus. He liked calling me a PP, short for Pragmatic Party. He still likes doing that.

If I understand the concept at least reasonably well phronesis does sound a lot like my pragmatic rationalism ideology. According to Wikipedia: “Phronesis (Ancient Greek: φρόνησῐς, romanized: phrónēsis) is an ancient Greek word for a type of wisdom or intelligence. It is more specifically a type of wisdom relevant to practical action, implying both good judgement and excellence of character and habits, sometimes referred to as "practical virtue". Phronesis was a common topic of discussion in ancient Greek philosophy.”

It seems to refer to evidence and reason based thinking and judgment, which is what pragmatic rationalism is intended to foster. People like Aristotle approved of the concept and used it in his ethics. Anyway, if phronesis and pragmatic rationalism are roughly the same thing, then I did not invent pragmatic rationalism. If so that's a good thing. In her 1951 masterpiece of human savagery, The Origins of Totalitarianism, Hannah Arendt asserted that no thought is politics was new. Only society and technology changes and that sweeps old ideas into them.

If Aristotle or his predecessors invented pragmatic rationalism under another name, that’s a comforting thought. If pragmatic rationalism really was new, that would be unsettling. It would suggest that it contained some flaw so serious as to have never even been worth describing in writing by minds far more intelligent and insightful than mine. Validation by ancient minds is far more comforting than any assertion of novelty in modern politics.

Roger Stone

The judge handed down a 40 month sentence for Stone’s seven felony convictions. That probably would have been the case despite the corrupt William Barr’s attempt to reduce the sentence for a felon ally of the president.

The gift to Trump: That kerfuffle aside, any Stone sentencing that includes time in the slammer provides a political solid gold asset for the president. Now, the president can pardon Stone the next time info comes out that is really embarrassing to the president. The Russians did that for Trump during the 2016 election, Wikileaks dumped stolen Podesta emails within an hour or two of the release of the Hollywood Access sex predator tape. That tactic it worked quite well.

So, if Bolton publishes his book and it shows the president to be what he is ( a liar, a crook, a traitor, etc,), the same day the president can just pardon Stone and the rabid, prostituted US mainstream media will devote slathering attention to the Stone thing. In essence, that will effectively deflect significant attention from what makes Trump look like what he is to froth about what he just did for Stone.

The judge comments: The judge commented: “There was nothing unfair about the investigation and the prosecution. He was not prosecuted for standing up for the president. He was prosecuted for covering up for the president. .... [he] took it upon himself to lie, to impede, to obstruct before the investigation was complete, in an endeavor to influence the result. .... The truth still exists; the truth still matters. .... Any suggestion that the prosecution in this case did anything untoward, unethical or improper is incorrect”

The truth still matters??: Trump supporters outside the courthouse were demanding a pardon for Stone. Apparently, being a serial felon doesn't faze some or most of the president’s supporters. If nothing else, the GOP (Trump Party) isn’t concerned about the rule of law as it applies to themselves. No doubt, the Trump Party will be happy to see it applied it with a vengeance to political enemies.

As long as the Trump party exerts power, America will continue it’s slide into a corrupt, lawless dictatorship. For most of then, their truth matters, not defensible truth.

What a Fool Believes

Change your beliefs, change your life.
By 

• Dr. Steven Eisenberg, Listener, Oncologist, Love-Lover, Cancer-Hater, Co-songwriter w/ patients: Because Illness Starts with 'I' & Wellness Starts with 'We'.

https://thriveglobal.com/stories/what-a-fool-believes/

Ha.

I’m a fool.

A fool who believes.

A fool to write every single day.

But I’ll always believe.

I believe in you.

I believe in the power of community.

I believe in one good song.

Take What a Fool Believes.

Written by Michael McDonald and Kenny Loggins. 

Recorded by The Doobie Brothers. 

The song received Grammy Awards in 1980 for both Song of the Year and Record of the Year.

“What a Fool Believes” was one of the few non-disco No. 1 hits that summer.

From Wiki: “The song lyrics tell a story of a man who is reunited with an old love interest and attempts to rekindle a romantic relationship with her before discovering that one never really existed.”

The Doobies believed.

I believe too.

I believe these notes are good for us, you and me.

I believe in love.

I believe that love works.

It just works.

Believe me.

Be a fool in love.

A fool who believes.

Microstep: Be zany today. Play a silly game. Be a fool in love. A fool who believes in the power of connection and community.

Opposition to the President Is Growing

 Michigan

Reuters reports that polling of about 88,000 US adults from August to December 2019 indicates that increasing opposition to the president continues to outpace increasing support. Reuters writes:

“NEW YORK (Reuters) - As Republican President Donald Trump seeks a second term in November, Americans’ interest in voting is growing faster in large cities dominated by Democrats than in conservative rural areas, according to an analysis of Reuters/Ipsos national opinion polls. 

If the trend lasts until Election Day on Nov. 3, it would be a reversal from the 2016 election when rural turnout outpaced voting in urban areas, helping Trump narrowly win the White House. 

The finding, based on responses from more than 88,000 U.S. adults who took the online poll from August to December 2015 or from August to December 2019, suggests that the “Blue Wave,” a swell of anti-Trump activism that followed his entry into the White House in 2017, is still rolling across the country’s largest population centers. 

Even as Trump commands rock-solid support among Republicans, voters’ interest in going to the polls appears to be growing faster among those who disapprove of Trump than among those who approve of him, according to experts who reviewed the data. 

The advantage in urban political engagement extends deep into the most competitive battleground states that Trump won by razor-thin margins four years ago, the data shows. 

In large urban areas of the upper Midwest, a region that includes swing states Michigan and Wisconsin, for example, the number of people who said they were “certain” to vote in the upcoming presidential election rose by 10 percentage points to 67% compared with survey responses from 2015.”

Of course, that is now. The election is still about 8 months off. Everything could change between now and then. A red tidal wave could sweep across the land and re-elect the president.

Also Michigan

Buying´ power *or is it* buying power´ (note accent marks)

Several prominent news organizations have reported that Michael Bloomberg has, so far, flooded the airwaves with some $400 million worth of campaign ads, all of which paid out of his own very deep pockets.  These ads seem to be having a tremendous effect on the populace-at-large’s voting selection, putting Bloomberg in second place in most Democratic polls.

So these questions arise:

 

- Can, indeed should, power, especially the power of the presidency, be sold to the highest bidder?

 

- Is this not shades of Citizens United* but in a singular form?

 

- Is this a further example of my Capitalism Gone Awry® complaint?

Give us your take on money in politics.

Thanks for recommending and commenting.

____________________________________________________________

*Wiki: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), is a landmark United States Supreme Court case concerning campaign finance. The Court held that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political communications by corporations, including nonprofit corporations, labor unions, and other associations.

In a majority opinion joined by four other justices, Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy held that the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act's prohibition of all independent expenditures by corporations and unions violated the First Amendment's protection of free speech.

Book Discussion: American Oligarchs

The C-Span 2 program, After Words broadcast a discussion with author Andrea Bernstein on how the Kushners and Trumps got to where they are today. The discussion is about her 2020 book, American Oligarchs: The Kushners, the Trumps and the Marriage of Money and Power. The story is a tale of lies, corruption, deceit and stunning political and law enforcement failures. The sheer degree and blatancy of political and law enforcement corruption is hard to internalize.

This program is 1 hour long and is at this link.

Trump’s Money Laundering Trail

Yesterday, the Rachael Maddow show aired a segment on a book to be released today, Dark Towers: Deutsche Bank, Donald Trump, and an Epic Trail of Destruction, on the money laundering trail that the president left in his wake. Along with the president, the other main culprit is the corrupt behemoth Deutsche Bank. The bank had to fire one of its employees who kept telling senior management that the president was laundering money. As usual, the bank denies all wrongdoing and rejects the truth mostly as a pack of lies.

A 7 minute segment on this topic is available from MSNBC at this link. In essence, every time there is evidence of financial shenanigans, it leads to a conclusion that there really were financial shenanigans, often accompanied by felony convictions or resignations to avoid an investigation. A 2 minute segment showing an interview with the book’s author David Enrich is at this link.

This segment is well worth the 7 minutes of time. It reviews the history of many of the president’s financial sleaze and corruption episodes that are now fading from memory of at least some people like me. It is good to have one’s memory refreshed.