Jews and Disease

Charlesmoscowitz.com

Judaism is obsessed with cleanliness and purity. These traditions go back to the ancient Temple in Jerusalem. The Bible delves into the intricacies of cleanliness as part of the Temple ritual. Jewish life includes layers of cleanliness such as the obligation to wash daily before meals, of Mikva, or regular ritual bathing, and of home cleaning. Judaism advocates meticulous practice regarding the quality and the handling of food which is a byproduct of Kosher laws.

The Jewish way of life was likely responsible for lower rates of contagion for Jews in the Middle Ages during the Bubonic Plague and other pandemics. Christians, noticing this phenomena, were susceptible to conspiracy theories blaming Jews for the plagues. As the panic spread, Christians wondered why Jews were not dying in the same numbers.

Jews were also better off when it came to prepping. Jews had lost their sovereignty in Judaea in Roman times and, as such, they were subject to the vicissitudes and caprice of Kings. Jews, who were banned from owning property, were routinely expelled from cities and Kingdoms, particularly in the 15th and 16th centuries. As a result Jews were more prepared to deal with major dislocations. The present pandemic should serve as a lesson to all of us, going forward, regarding our levels of individual and family preparedness.

Jews are obsessed with cleanliness. Jews are germophobes. Jewish faith and culture teaches this as a central value. The Jewish lesson of cleanliness should be remembered by Jews today and should be studied and adapted, with cultural variations, by all.

Shelter in Place

I am privileged in the real sense.

My wife and I are riding it out in my mother's summer cottage. My mother is away. Our college age daughter is safely isolated at home in our city apartment. The refrigerator is well stocked with our favorite food. We watch movies, we telecommute, we watch and listen to music videos, we take long walks in the wooded surroundings and we sleep...a lot.

Lurking outside our door is the biggest crisis we've ever witnessed. The sense of doom permeates the land as the numbers of those infected and the dead rises every day, both at home and around the world. Like most people, we dread, with every sniffle, that we are infected.

My decades of involvement in politics fill me with fear as the economy shuts down and civil liberties are cast aside in response to the real emergency. We are afraid to look at our retirement account, which reflects decades of work and savings, and we worry about relatives and friends in business who have been shuttered.

We hope that enough Americans understand the constitutional principles that have under-girded our society, principles that we have, until now, taken for granted. Do enough Americans understand these principles well enough to insure that they are restored and re-asserted after the crisis? Time will tell.

In the meantime, let's stay safe. One lesson that should be learned is that we should all be prepared, going forward, for any crisis by stocking up on essentials to survive for at least 4-6 weeks. We need to learn a new level of self-sufficiency and the value of individual and family autonomy.

The Coronavirus agenda?

First...a disclaimer.

Follow the recommendations of the CDC and your State Government. Engage in social distancing and, if recommended, stay indoors as much as possible. The Surgeon General says that this week and possibly next are the peak danger periods for the virus to spread. Stay safe and healthy.

Having said that, I can't help but note how what is going on, an unprecedented situation by which American and, indeed, world society is being literally controlled, we can't even leave our homes, fits into a globalist agenda. While this is clearly an emergency situation, let's be vigilant in terms of ensuring that we re-assert our constitutional rights once the emergency has passed.

I am encouraged by the news, emanating from The Still Report, that an Israeli drug company, Teva, will be donating 10 million doses of Hydro-Chloriquine to the United States by the end of March.

An Ethnograph: The anti-Trump movement

        The anti-Trump movement, which developed as a result of the nomination and then the election of Donald J. Trump as President of the United States in 2016, has developed several specific characteristics that are rare in American history but are more commonly found in authoritarian and tribal societies. Americans, in general, expect to be a part of, or expect to witness vigorous and at times fierce debate over political and cultural issues. Indeed, such debate has been the hallmark of our free society and our willingness to tolerate such debate has served as a barometer measuring the overall health or sickness of our society.

          The reaction to the election of Donald Trump, among certain segments of his opposition, has not been the societal norm in America and this speaks to the perception on the part of these segments of what it means to be an American. The first cultural manifestation of the anti-Trump movement came about when the opposition started calling themselves “the resistance” which is an old communist idea. Instead of viewing themselves as the “loyal opposition,” in accord with American traditions, when the defeated party competes with the victors for the mind and hearts of Americans on the field of law and opinion, the opposition positioned itself, in a manner similar to a communist revolution, as resisting the government and, in the de-facto sense, trying to overthrow the government. This expressed itself when members of “the resistance” expressed rage at Democratic Senators who voted to ratify the new Administration’s nominees for cabinet positions, not because they necessarily disagreed with the nomination, per se, but rather simply because by ratifying the nominee the Senator had enabled the Trump Administration to establish a functioning government.

        The anti-Trump movement breaks down into two camps, one that is whitting and conscious, and the other largely unwhitting and unconscious. This metric, as would be the case with any metric that attempts to examine a society or a group, is inexact and most members of this specific movement, as it is defined here, embrace variations of and different levels of both camps. It should be noted that the vast majority of Americans who oppose the Trump Administration, including the majority of those who voted against him, are normally and legitimately opposed to him for the same reasons that anyone opposes any President or Administration. They legitimately disagree with specific or general policies or issues the administration supports or they dislike Trump’s style as a leader and as a person. This ethnograph focuses on a specific segment of that opposition, one that, I argue, is outside the norm.

          The first camp, the whitting and conscious camp, is what Trump accurately has identified as the “deep state” or the “swamp.” These are people, both Democrats and Republicans, who have accumulated power over many decades if not over the last half century. They have been euphemistically referred to by various names including the Eastern Seaboard Liberal Establishment. They are generally White Anglo-Saxon Protestants who are amoral and non-ideological with the exception of believing it as virtuous to turn the United States into a province and a cash cow for a world order that they hope to control. Their clients are often people of color who have accepted various favors from them. Government power is part of their lifestyle and an outsider like Donald Trump, who is not beholden to special interests and who, as a largely self-funded candidate who spent relatively little money to get elected, threatens their power. It should be noted that self-described Socialist Bernie Sanders, however misguided, also threatens their power which is why they have gone to such great lengths to stop his movement. This whitting camp has made major inroads, over several decades and through the use of the carrot and the stick, into American cultural institutions of education, corporations and the media. Their amoral agenda, as described by Italian communist social scientist Antonio Gramsci as the “long march through the institutions” has resulted in their control of the high-ground today in the United States.  

        They have shown themselves as willing to engage in ruthless and extra-legal tactics to stop and to possibly remove President Trump from office such as their promotion, with the help of their media mandarins, of the preposterous claim that President Trump is a Russian spy. The Obama Administration ensured that the White House, and the intelligence establishment, was fully staffed with conspirators who would try to stymie Trump’s agenda at every turn. They spied on Trump, created a phony dossier with the help, ironically, of Russian sources, and then used the information to get Robert Mueller, one of their own, appointed as a Special Prosecutor. The Mueller conspiracy, with its constant media drumbeat of blockbuster impending indictments, dragged on for over two years and this was followed by the ridiculous claim that Trump had conspired with the Ukrainians by asking them to open an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden, an investigation that Biden had himself previously shut down after threatening to withhold American aid to Ukraine. President Trump was impeached for what he clearly and accurately described as a hoax.

           The second camp, the largely unwitting camp, consists of those who really don’t know what is going on but who respond, in Pavlovian fashion, to the drumbeat of manufactured outrage reported, in a concertized style, by stooges, some whitting and some not, by the mainstream media. This camp is stimulated by half-truths and lies relating to identity politics, a practice that has gained momentum in recent decades. Race relations, and racial inequality and segregation, is the most shameful chapter of American history and its legacy lingers on. Recent decades have witnessed leftists exploiting these tensions for political gain while covering up their own de-facto racist policies which often promulgate and prolong racial tensions and inequality. President Trump has presided over unprecedented gains on the part of African-Americans on all levels and this is, I would argue, directly attributable to his policies.

        Yet the second unwhitting camp is fooled into believing that Donald Trump and his movement have something against African-American men and women. This type of cynical and exploitative narrative, fueled by hate and fear, has certainly been employed, almost routinely, against enemies of the left since the 1960’s but never before at such a ferocious and divisive level. The manipulators are willing to shred the fabric of American society with demagogic emotional claims and all as a means to preserve and to advance their leftist enterprise by attempting to utterly destroy their opposition.

          I have experienced the anti-Trump phenomena in my own life as an outspoken conservative in my liberal community. Before the Trump election, I had been seeing a therapist for several years going back to the collapse of my business in 2008 and the problems I experienced as a result. He had always found my conservative activism, my books, and my media, to be mildly amusing. He had explained to me that my conservatism emanated from my need to get attention, putting aside that I would have likely been more successful and notable as an author, columnist and radio host if I had been a liberal. In the sessions I had with him leading up to the Trump election, he became completely unglued and unprofessional in his diatribes. It was as if he had become a different person. Perhaps, for the first time, he felt that his liberal world was being shaken.

          He stopped working with me the day after the election explaining that in order for us to continue I would not be allowed to discuss politics. Likewise with the Thanksgiving that year, which was held at the New York home of friends of my wife's family, where I was informed in advance that the dinner would be “trump free.” At the time, I was broadcasting once a week at Tufts University College radio station WMFO where I was an open supporter of Trump. In the ensuing months, I was reported by a listener to the “anti-bias” police and an extremely derogatory and inflammatory article was published about me in the school newspaper. This was followed by my hour mover to 3 am in the morning. I got the hint and left.

          Likewise with my job selling health and life insurance as a representative of Aflac. The manager of the office called me into his office, asked me if I was a Trump supporter which I answered affirmatively, and told me that I would have to work from home going forward. I left that job as well. Likewise with my TV show at Boston Neighborhood Network. The atmosphere there had become toxic and my wife was concerned, and rightfully, that my visibility in the community as a Trump supporter due to that show might hurt our daughters chances of getting into a Boston area College. I agreed to leave. My hairdresser informed me around this time that he didn’t want me to come back.

          I could easily continue with details illustrating the toxicity of the anti-Trump movement but I will leave this study by noting that in order to continue my YouTube program and other media activities that were left to me, I had to change my name. I did this both to protect my family from possible negative consequences that might arise from my support of President Trump and to ensure that they were separated from me and my views as they are also opponents of President Trump. Meanwhile, under an assumed name, I shall continue, as best as I am able, to support the president and to examine the nature of his opposition and what it means for American society.   

Harvard Peobody Museum of Ethnology and Archeology: Ethnography Essay

1. What is “Holism” and how does the exibit “Of the Contested West” demonstrate theideal of researching and writing from a holistic prespective. 

What is Holism?

The holistic approach in Anthropology involves the examination of a person, a particular identifiable situation or an activity, a subgroup, or a culture as a whole in an integrated context that considers all factors that make up the studied culture. Sociologist C Wright Mills expanded the concept further by emphicizing the study of the individual, and his “troubles,” and the culture, and its “problems” in a historical as well as in a present context. This intricate study includes how individuals and groups within a culture interact with each other and how they interact with other cultures they come into contact with.

Two examples othat demonstrate a holistic approach from the exibit: Of the Contested West.

A. Tokakreiyapi

The display entitled “Tokakreiyapi” or Enemies, demonstrates how various native tribes of the plains and the west had a long history of warfare against each other. Certain tribes, like the Lakota and Oglala Sioux, came to dominate and oppress weaker tribes, many of which would later form alliances with American settlers and with US and Canadian forces who provided protection. 

The native tribes generally had a long history of fragmentation which included the development of various separate militias, each with its own traditions, secret societies, and rituals of initiation. While they often formed alliances when confronting external emergencies such as American westward expansion, their history of fragmentation, their lack of a central authority, and other cultural elementsset them at a distinct disadvantage in their attempt to stem the western expansion and usurpation of their land. 

The United States, in contrast, maintained a unified and organized government, particularly after the defeat of the Confederacy in 1865, and was thus poised to weild a upper hand in the struggle for the west. From the beginning, the American Republic had unified around a political and philosophical principle which would be articulated at the time of the Mexican War and that was called  “Manifest Destiny.”

B. Wigohpiyatu

The display entitled “Wigohpiyatu” demonstrates the religion of the native tribes of the plains and the west. The religion of the tribes, with variations depending on the individual tribe, tended to view the human being as merged with and as such morally equivalent to all of  nature. This view tended to discourage the development of the strong and self-directed sovereign individual and such concepts common to western civilization as personal self interest.

This orientation toward a primitive form of collectivism and pantheism perhaps contributed to a lack of development of political infrastructure such as private property which retarded the development of settled communities, farms, small businesses, manufacturing, and local representative government. The native tribes were slow to develop a written language and independent cultural and educational institutions which made it difficult for them to preserve, maintain and advance their own culture. 

The United States, in contrast, adopted a religious belief that held that the human being was created in the image of God and, as such, was superior to nature and responsible for its responsible stewardship. Americans believed that they derived their individual sovereign rights from God and that the state served to protect those God given rights. This faith tended to foster the development of strong, creative, and innovative individual citizens and a society more prone to solving problems.

2. On the “Ethnographic Research Method.”

The Penobscot display shows how the Penobscot tribes of Maine, part of the Wabanaki Confederacy, created canoes that would be adapted by Americans and would become standard. Traditional Penobscot canoes were revived in the late 19th Century where construction began that combined traditional and modern methods and materials. The Penobscots formed loose alliances with Americans who were part of a late 19The Century back to nature movement that included summer camps, hiking and fishing clubs, summer resorts set in nature, boy scouts, and other naturalist oriented groups. 

The tribes of the Wabanaki Confederacy had a long history of interaction with Englih and Franch colonists, and later with the United States and Canada, that held both positive and negative elements. The negative elements included the introduction of alcohol and disease, both of which devastated the native population. Posative aspects included the development of trading relationships in furs, logging,  trapping and fishing, relationships which would re-emerge in the late 19th Century as Penobscots worked with westerners on canoe construction and they became nature guides serving the influx of nature tourists. Penibscots had preserved many of their traditional crafts which they marketed to tourists.

The loose alliance of Penobsots, whose government received compensation and State and Federal recognition in the 1970’s after a lengthy lawsuit, and environmental groups, working with State and Federal government agencies, were successful in removing the Vecie Dam, which blocked the Penobscot River. This significantly helped to restore the river to its natural condition which might encourage the spawning of salmon and other deep sea fish.

3. On Archeology

The essential difference between Archeology and Anthropology is that while Archeology is the study of past societies and civilizations based on physical evidence, Anthropology tens to emphacize a study of the customs, behavior, social norms, religion, and philosophy of the society studied. The locus of Archeology is the past and the effort involves a look backward. The locus of Anthropology is the present, how a society evolved, how a society became extinct from the prespective of its final stage, what are the remnantal societal influences of the studied society on the present.

4. On Economic Anthropology

The Sub-Arctic Display illustrates how the natives of the Arctic and sub-Arctic had developed long established trading routes. Tribes held summer fairs along the western coast of Alaska, annual fairs that were visited by tribal members across the nortt as well as Siberia. These events resulted in a great deal of cultural cross polinization, social interaction and economic trade. The various northern tribes were nomadic as they established temporary villages fgeared toward the summer and winter seasons. The northern tribeal members were accomplished hunters and fishermen as the artifacts in the museum indicate. These tribes primarily subsisted on meat and fish as vegetation was sparce due to the perma-frost.

5. Redistribution and connecting to Language and Culture (Lingustic Anthropology)

Potlatch

The tradition of Potlatch, which took place amongst the people of the native tribes primarily on the Pacific coast of Canada, seemed to involve a combination of annual trading, cultural activity, religious ritual, and tribal governance possibly including treaties between tribes. Museum artifacts seem to indicate that there was some cannibalism involved and, one might speculate, perhaps other practices that would clash with western societal values. The Potlatch ritual involved a fairly regimented caste system by which certain families, based upon their heridatary status, would receive certain goods that might have been attained through craftmanship, trade, or plunder resulting from war.

Artifacts at the museum exibit include a Speakers Staff, which was used by the chief to direct proceedings, and singers batons which were used to conduct the music associated with a ceremony. The museum has a Hamatza rattle, shaped in the form of a skull that is made of wood and that is filled with pebbles that rattle when shaken, and this is described as an instrument that was used to prevent cannibalism. The museum has Hamatza whistles which were described as instruments to control cannibalism. Other artifacts include beaded blankets and pieces of copper which were given as trinkets to members of upper casts.

The White settlers brought disease which decimated the native population of the region in the mid to late 19th Century. The natives responded by moving to White forts and trading posts. This adversely effected the structure of the Potlatch as the cast status of the natives became confused by the intermingling of the decimated tribe and, thus, the ritual aspect of the Potlatch was disrupted.

Canada outlawed the Potlatch in 1884. The official reason for this action was that the Canadian government sould to end what they deemed to be immoral practices. It is unlikely that cannibalism and perhaps other practices were going on at that point which raises some other motives such as a desire to assimilate the native peoples by depriving them of their central tradition. As a matter of public policy, Canada, which was known to be more harsh than the United States in native policies, wanted to reduce and end any form of national identity on the part of the native peoples.

As a result, the Potlatch went underground and was thus often conducted in secret. The Potlatch ban was repealed in 1951, over a half a century later, and the result has been a revival of Potlatch in British Columbia, a ritual that is going strong, sans the cannibalism and other practices, to this day.

National Geographic Enduring Voices Project

The mission of the Enduring Voices Project is to identify the dying and nearly extinct languages of the world, determine how the endangered language is connected to the boi-diversity of the region where it exists, and to draw attention to the endangered language. The Enduring Voices Project seeks to help indigenous people to revitalize and maintain their own language. 

Languages die out for a variety of reasons. The result is the absorption of the language into the dominant language of the region with some remnants remaining such as certain words, expressions or accents remaining in the region and sometimes being adopted by the speakers of the dominant language. The absorption of a dying language into a dominant language includes the absorption of various aspects of a culture, a religion, or a national or potentially national identity. This can happen either organically over periods of time or by political or military force over shorter periods of time. Old or even ancient languages have been discovered in isolated regions such as a Latin like language spoken in certain remote Alpine valleys of Italy and Switzerland, or Aramaic spoken in parts of Syria and Iraq.

The Crime of Voter Fraud

The Crime of Voter Fraud

We are entitled to our opinion, as the old cliché goes, but conventional standards of honesty dictate that our opinion should be backed by fact and by evidence. Otherwise hearsay, conspiracy speculation, half-truths extracted from isolated statistics, meaningless factoids and outright lies become the order of the day. Honesty calls for the correction of misinformation and the exposure of lies. Otherwise falsehoods, especially when hatched by interested parties, might threaten the social order and often contribute to a dangerous atmosphere of bigotry and hate.

Such a self-serving lie, one that serves the dual purpose of galvanizing supporters and stoking hatreds against opponents, is promulgated by Democrats who claim that Republicans conspire to disenfranchise black voters. This big lie demonizes and scapegoats Republicans by re-enforcing the false stereotype that they have something against black men and women. The perpetrators of this fraud could care less about fanning the flames of racial division with such a lie as, indeed, this is exactly their intention. They charge racial conspiracy in order to emotionally energize black voters, many of whom appear to be losing interest in their leftist policies and agenda.

This self-serving lie allows the Democrats to turn the tables on reforms being implemented by various states, both liberal and conservative, to reduce voter fraud. Such efforts include a reasonable means to provide registered voters with free ID and the culling from voter rolls of voters who have either died or moved out of state. These attempts to preserve the integrity of one man one vote are opposed by those who engage in voter fraud. The fraudsters change the subject by intoning racist insults against black people by absurdly suggesting that they are not capable of obtaining free voter ID at the voting booth.

Is voter fraud a real problem? The liberal Washington Post, in an Oct. 24, 2014 article entitled: Could non-citizens decide the November Election? found that 6.4% of non-citizens voted in 2008 and 2.2% in 2010. The article speculates that non-citizens in Minnesota may have elected Al Franken, who won his election by only 312 votes, and that non-citizens may have carried North Carolina for Obama in 2008. The Post estimates that 80% of the non-citizen vote went to Democrats. During this election cycle, reports have been verified that in Illinois and Maryland voting machines have been calibrated to vote Democratic. Absentee ballots and voting my mail, which is now done exclusively in Washington State and Colorado, presents obvious opportunities for fraud. There is no way of determining who sent in the ballot and this is exacerbated by millions of ballots mailed to outdated voter lists. Problems also exist around College students voting in their home state by absentee ballot and in the state where they are attending College.

From the time of the American Revolution until the present, hundreds of thousands of American men and women in uniform have sacrificed their lives in order to uphold the principle of one man one vote. The Civil War ended the sweltering oppression of chattel slavery and established the right of blacks to vote. The Civil Rights Acts further insured the integrity of the black vote. Women suffragists struggled to achieve the vote for women. These great advances in terms of enfranchising more Americans are now threatened by those who would deliberately conspire to dilute those sacred votes with self-serving acts of fraud.

By compromising the integrity of the vote they engage not only in a war against women and a racist attack on the integrity of the black vote but they are at war with the most basic institution of American democracy. They are compromising the right of the citizen to have their vote counted in an honest election by which the vote of the citizen is the purest and most basic expression of self-government.  

Ethnography: The New Hampshire Primary - 2020

Ethnography: 

The New Hampshire Primary - 2020

          The New Hampshire Presidential Primary was held on Tuesday, Feb. 11^th 2020 and I traveled to Manchester, NH, on February 9^th and 10^th. I previously observed New Hampshire Primaries in Manchester in 1992, 1996, 2000, 2008, 2012 and 2016. Manchester is the largest city in the state and is where the national media and most of the campaigns are headquartered. Manchester, in the days leading up to the primary, provides an inexact and informal glimpse into presidential candidates and national political trends.

           I visited the Manchester campaign offices of Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttagieg, Andrew Yang and Elizabeth Warren and I hung out at the Doubletree Hotel which serves as an informal headquarters for the national and Boston media. I drove Uber passengers on both days and in that capacity I spoke with local Manchester citizens, most of whom seemed oblivious to the political goings on in their city, and media figures who offered me a great deal of inside information. I drove the nephew of candidate Tom Stryer, who was serving as his campaign coordinator. My conversation with him revealed strategies and memes that Democrats will likely employ against President Trump in the general election.

          The Bernie Sanders office staff was serious and determined, quiet and focused. The atmosphere in his office was one of confidence and calm. One of the volunteers described to me in detail their ground game strategy and how they were canvassing door to door. Sanders positions are clear and are well known. Sanders people were hard at work and I sensed that they were going to win, although, the office generally lacked the energy and enthusiasm of 2016, the year Sanders achieved a major New Hampshire victory even though all the delegates went to Hillary Clinton. Perhaps the Sanders campaign, having been previously ripped off by the Democratic Party, was a bit cynical, perhaps a bit wary and jaded.

          The Elizabeth Warren office was spare and looked threadbare and the few volunteers who were there and who were tugging in seemed demoralized and depressed. The general attitude among Democrats I spoke with in other campaign offices and on the street was that Warren is despised and, to toss in a bot of editorial commentary, for good reason. In all my years of coming to New Hampshire primaries, My opinion: I have never witnessed a more disreputable presidential candidate and a phonier person running for President than Elizabeth Warren.

         The Pete Buttagieg staff seemed motivated but confused in terms of how to answer questions about his positions. I didn’t get much of a sense of who Buttagieg is or why I should support him. On the wall of the Buttigieg office was photos of Buttagieg, his boyfriend or husband, and, presumably, two of their dogs. I got the same sense from Buttagieg that I got from Barack Obama when I visited Manchester during the primary in 2008. He looks good, he sounds intelligent, he came out of nowhere and he says little of substance but he does so with elegance and a phony intellectual accent. Like Obama, Buttegieg has a nice smile. This worked for Obama but I’m not sure this same trick will work for Buttagieg, at least I hope not. Like Obama, Buttegieg poses as a moderate and garners conservative cross-over support. Buttagieg, however, lacks Obama’s chrisma and cult following, at least outside the gay community, and I don’t sense that even they are all that enthusiastic about him.

          Andrew Yang had strong and even passionate support both from his office staff and from people walking in off the street. Yang appears to be not as vague or as slippery as Buttagieg and, I suspect, a lot of his supporters will end up supporting President Trump after he drops out. For the same reason that Buttagieg had high numbers of gay people in his office, Yang had a good number of Asians in his. Democratic candidates, and their electorate, often promote and exploit identity politics which is a problem for Biden and an even bigger problem for the faux Native American Warren. Joe Biden and is followers were virtually invisible and he was never mentioned. I saw one bumper sticker and that is all. I witnessed Amy Klobacher get on her bus of green festooned with as giant AMY.

          The real rock star of the New Hampshire primary this year, by any objective estimation, and the candidate who captured the lions share of the energy, was undoubtedly President Trump who held a rally at the SNHU Center on the Monday before the Tuesday vote. While I didn’t attend the rally itself, I observed the goings on outside and at the Doubletree Hotel which was the media center nearby. Trump supporters were out in force, both at the rally and on the street both days that I was there with their handmade signs and their carts of merchandise. They possessed an air of subversive excitement. To quote the King in the Pogo Comic: The peasants are revolting! 

          In the lead-up to the Trump rally, streets were closed and people were streaming in like they were going to Woodstock. The atmosphere was festive and stood in stark contrast to the scowling media figures prowling around at the virtually empty Doubletree. A few straggling anti-Trumpers stood on the periphery of the rally holding vulgar and obscene signs while the liberal media doyens inside the empty hotel muttered obscenities as they sipped their Chablis and drowned their sorrows by gorging themselves in Fois Gras and other indescribable food popular with liberal types.  

          My general impression of the Trump supporters was that they can be a bit rough around the edges, unfashionable according to liberal standards, but they are genuinely sincere and well-meaning working people. My impression is that the mainstream liberal media falsely portrays the Trump supporters, and President Trump himself as somehow hateful. I saw no evidence of this.

He who shall not be named

How I write books

How I write books

In 1998, I was working as a weekday radio talk show host and in that capacity I did a great deal of reading articles and books which was required as preparation for interviewing guests and discussing topics. Before the show, I did show prep by jotting down on a legal pad an outline of issues and questions that I would raise with my guest during the interview.

The late Dr. Samuel L. Blumenfeld, an author and columnist who had become a regular guest on the show, encouraged me to turn my show notes into 600 word columns for publication. I had no experience up until that point as a writer. Sam explained to me that by writing an article about a topic that I felt passionate about, I would organize and clarify my thinking on the topic while delving deeper into the issue through reading and research.

This was how I began to write articles which would eventually evolve into full length books. Since that time, I’ve authored hundreds of articles and 15 full length books. Writing has become a major part of my life and I am now further advancing my craft with courses at Bunker Hill Community College.

I start an article or a book by putting together a brief, bare-boned outline which lists the issues that I will cover. For an article, this might consist of a couple of talking points, for a book, this would be an outline of chapters, an outline that would be subject to change as the project develops. While writing an article usually takes me 2-3 days, writing a book can take me up to a year.

I am then ready for the free association part of the project which involves jotting down everything that I know off the top of my head and my opinions and theories. This part of the work usually moves quickly.

I am then ready for the research part of the project which is actually the most interesting thing for me. This involves deeper reading, research, footnoting, sites, and investigation, This takes up most of the time involved and this is where the real learning takes place. In the course of the research, my opinions might change as they become more defined and as I add substance to the scaffolding.

Simultaneous to the research, I edit the project which involves a focus on syntax, style, metaphor, structure, humour, grammar and punctuation. By this means, I insure that the words and sentences flow properly, that they hang together in a metaphoric tapestry, and that the ideas are presented in such a way that they are clear and that they make sense.

The final edit, a final comb through the text, involves getting rid of un-nessasary words, sentences, paragraphs, and ideas that are not germaine to the theme of the article or book. This can often be difficult as I have, for various reasons, become attached to certain words and concepts that really don’t work. This is when the book takes shape as a viable manuscript.

Ethnography Part 1: My three year experiment with left-right talk radio

My three year experiment with left-right talk radio

From 2010-2012 I co-hosted a weekday radio talk show with liberal San Francisco activist and author Patrick O’Heffernan. I had forged a reputation as a conservative radio host and author who often interviewed liberals and who strove to engage in constructive dialogue. My past guests included such left luminaries as Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Gloria Steinum and Congressman Barney Frank who I ended up running against in the 2004 election.

Patrick and I rotated as hosts, by phone, and we scheduled an equal number of guests, authors, and personalities from both the left and the right. I noticed certain predictable patterns emerge from my co-host early on and these became more intense as time went by. My analysis of his behavior and that of many of our liberal guests, along with my own experience as a former liberal who grew up in and who continues to operate in a liberal enviornment, instructs my opinions and offers me a  prespective based upon careful study and inside experience.

Patrick rarely engaged in what could be described as a normal exchange of ideas and opinions. He was all about winning at any cost and he world resort to dirty tactics which he deliverd with an inpenetratable air of authority and erudition. I did not view the show as a contest and while I enjoy persuasion and political combat I’m not afraid to be wrong. Talking with Patrick on the air often felt like I was talking to a taped message.

I soon realized that Patrick lied to win his arguments and, worse, that he occasionally initiated a lie to catch me off guard. While on the air, it was obviously impossible for me to do the research required to refute his often outlandish contentions in real time. I would conduct the research later and, the next day, I would politely raise the contradiction. While he would respond by acknowledging that he was wrong, when confronted by evidence, he would wait about a week and go back to pushing the same lie as if nothing had happened. In the early part of our work together, I naievly didn’t catch the lie but as time went on I began to call him out. The result was that our professional and personal relationship eventually desintigrated. I started to notice this same pattern with other liberals, as well as a tendency on their part to severely constrict their exposure to opposing opinion. This has led me to wonder whether liberals operate in a fantasy world of their own ideological construction.

Patrick often behaved brutally with our conservative guests especially when they were women. If Patrick felt he couldn’t defend his liberal position with a guest, particularly an author, or if he felt that the author presented a case devastating to his liberal belief, he would approach the interview by literally changing the subject and sticking to irrelevant to the interview. When interviewing Dr. Judith Reisman, author of Sexual Sabatoge, he insisted on discussing some current controversy about advertising at high school football games, which had absolutely nothing to do with Dr. Reisman’s research. Other times, in classic leftist agit-prop style, in order to discredit an author or a columnist he didn’t want to answer to he would uncover some miniscule mistake, an outdated footnote, a wrong date, and he would procede to pound away at it in an attempt to hurt their credibility and avoid the relevant subject.

Patrick consistently conformed to a liberal party line. I would prep for the afternoon show by listening to progressive Boston radio host Jeff Santos. With rare exceptions, Patrick, during our opening dialogue before we invited our guest to join us, would regurgitate the exact same talking points that were mouthed by Jeff Santos earlier in the day. Not only would Patrick parrot the same ideas and items, but he would deliver his comments often using the exact same words that Jeff used and even the same mannerisms and intonations. I have observed, over time, that liberals tend to engage in group-think and they rarely deviate.

Certainly conservatives lie and conform from time to time but I have noticed a trend amongst liberals in this regard which has led me to speculate over the possibility that lying and conformity is more than a casual event for them but, rather, this is something that they internalize as a basic and necessary part of their ideology. They seem to feel justified in these practices as they think that such actions preserve and advance their idea of progress and are thus justified. Perhaps this reflects the old communist maxim: “You’ve got to break a few eggs to make an omelet.”