Monthly Archives: May 2017

1894

Culture, Media

 

On January 27, 2017, The New Yorker published an article by Adam Gopnik titled, “Orwell’s 1984 and Trump’s America.”  Gopnik admits he had never been a fan of the 1949 classic about a dystopian future, describing it as “too pat” and rooted in the Brits’ immediate post-WWII dissatisfaction with rationing and general pessimism about a return to normalcy.  However, Gopnik reassesses his position after observing Comrade Trump’s behavior during the first week of his tenure in office.  Referencing the daily claims by Trump and his minions about the size of the inaugural crowed or how he would have won the popular vote except for millions of illegally cast ballots, Gopnik writes:

The blind, blatant disregard for truth is offered without even the sugar-façade of sweetness of temper or equableness or entertainment—offered not with a sheen of condescending consensus but in an ancient tone of rage, vanity, and vengeance. Trump is pure raging authoritarian id.

And so, rereading Orwell, one is reminded of what Orwell got right about this kind of brute authoritarianism—and that was essentially that it rests on lies told so often, and so repeatedly, that fighting the lie becomes not simply more dangerous but more exhausting than repeating it. Orwell saw, to his credit, that the act of falsifying reality is only secondarily a way of changing perceptions. It is, above all, a way of asserting power.

The two words which caught my attention were “ancient tone.”  While Orwell’s chronicle of things to come looks forward in time, by using this phrase, Gopnik suggests we’ve been there before.  After all, Trump’s promise to “Make America Great Again” suggests he too wishes to emulate a past era.  Thus, the title of this blog “1894.”

Flipping from “1984” to “1894” was inspired by the political satire group The Capitol Steps.  At the end of each performance they include a narrative titled “Lirty Dies” in which they reverse the first letters in each phrase.  For example, they refer to the White House occupant as “Tronald Dump.”  But a quick Google search of the term “major events in 1894” suggested interposing the middle digits of these two years was more than just a gimmick.  It was one more example of what Carl Jung called “synchronicity,” the unintentional connection of seemingly unrelated experiences.  Consider the following actual events from 1894 (with commentary in italics).

  • On January 9, New England Telephone and Telegraph installs the first battery-operated telephone switch.  Was this just one more milestone toward the creation of the Internet and Twitter?
  • March 12, Coca-Cola is sold in bottles for the first time.  Otherwise there would be no need for Trump to install another red button on the Resolute Desk in the oval office.
  • March 25, the first significant American protest march when Ohio business man Jacob Coxey leads an “army” of unemployed workers to Washington, D.C.  The march was triggered by the Panic of 1893 much as the Women’s March and March for Science were inspired by the Panic of 2016.
  • May 11, three thousand Pullman Palace Car workers go on strike to protest lowered wages and reduced benefits.  After the strike is crushed, Paul Ryan transports Republican members of Congress to the White House to celebrate what he proudly calls TrumpedCare.
  • July 4, Sanford Dole, the son of missionaries, establishes the Republic of Hawaii and is named its first president.  In 2017, the Republic is renamed by Attorney General Jefferson Beauregard Sessions “an island in the Pacific Ocean.”
  • November 5, West Palm Beach, Florida becomes an incorporated city.  In anticipation of the new municipality becoming the center of the United States government, the first city commission reserves 40 acres of land for the commander-in-chief’s residence which they dub Mar-a-Largess.  Plans include a secured dining room.

Welcome to 1894.  As suggested a few days ago, everything old really is new again.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

 

Everything I Needed to Know I Learned from Judge Judy

Random Thoughts

 

DR_ESPYou may have noticed this is the first post in a new category called, “Random Thoughts.”  I had originally considered calling it, “Just Me,” but appreciate the fact America can only handle one raging narcissist at a time.  The purpose of this new grouping is to share some personal observations about creativity, how I use this blog to improve my own creative process and generic topics which do not necessarily fit into one or more of the topical categories.  Thank you in advance for this egocentric indulgence.

Also, thank you for all of your kind comments and support over the past 18 months.  This blog first appeared on-line on October 10, 2015.  At the time, one of my motivations was “learning by doing.”  If I wanted to now know more about blogs, why not start one.  I had originally planned to publish entries once or twice a month.  But as they say, “The best laid plans…”  Today’s entry is the 161st post.  Who knew?

Second, I have been receiving more and more suggestions about potential topics.  While these recommendations are very helpful in terms of understanding what is on your mind, I’m afraid it’s not how it works.  As I hope you realize, almost every post includes a phrase like, “I started to think about this when…”  In other words, I do not consciously pick the topics.  Something, usually a totally unrelated event or memory, becomes the kernel for a new post.  How do I know this?  Because, while I have now published 161 posts to this site, there are dozens in draft form which I have never completed.  When I go back to them from time to time, I immediately realize they were forced.  I had nothing unique or insightful to add to the conversation.  They were just my personal opinion.  As Kenny Rogers reminds us, “You need to know when to fold ’em.”

Consider the following example.  A lot of people have shared their opinion about the series of interviews Comrade Trump has given recently.  On his Monday night broadcast, Steve Colbert’s defense of his CBS colleague Face the Nation host John Dickerson was both brilliant and brutal.  That’s why I leave opining to the professionals. Remember, creativity is about great questions; get the question right and the answers will come.  The question I kept asking myself about the Trump interviews?  What did they miss?

Which brings us to Judge Judy, my one guilty pleasure. (In the interest of honesty, I probably have more than one.) Among her platitudes, my favorite is, “If it doesn’t make sense, it probably isn’t true.”  I know.  His Orangeness says a lot of things that do not make sense.  Most recently, Andrew Jackson could not understand why there had to be a Civil War?  Chalk that one up to ignorance.  And there is a YUGE difference between lying and mental incapacity.  This is where Judge Judy comes in.  By honing in on a minor detail, she is often able to unravel a plaintiff’s or defendant’s false testimony.

Much was made of Trump gaffe during his April 11 interview with Fox Business News host Maria Bartiromo during which he said the target of the April 6 Tomahawk Missile strike was “Iraq.”

TRUMP: So what happens is I said we’ve just launched 59 missiles heading to Iraq and I wanted you to know this. And he was eating his cake. And he was silent.

BARTIROMO:  (INAUDIBLE) to Syria?

TRUMP:  Yes. Heading toward Syria. In other words, we’ve just launched 59 missiles heading toward Syria.  And I want you to know that, because I didn’t want him to go home.  We were almost finished.  It was a full day in Palm Beach.  We’re almost finished and I — what does he do, finish his dessert and go home and then they say, you know, the guy you just had dinner with just attacked a country?

BARTIROMO:  How did he react?

TRUMP:  So he paused for 10 seconds and then he asked the interpreter to please say it again.  I didn’t think that was a good sign.

But the real “tell” was his assertion the generals told him they had just launched 59 missiles.  The night of the attack, it was reported there were 60 missiles launched of which 59 hit their intended targets.  First, it’s difficult to believe the generals would want their commander-in-chief to give such specific information to the Chinese president.  Second, before the damage assessment, why would the generals tell Trump there were 59 missiles launched?  This is what I call an “Occam’s Razor” moment.  The simplest explanation?  If Trump made up the detail about the number of missiles, everything else is suspect.  Except the dessert.

Judge Judy, thank you for helping me expose Trump as fabricator-in-chief.  In gratitude, I’ve just sent you the most beautiful piece of chocolate cake you’ve ever seen.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP