Understanding America?

It was an enormous surprise 4 years ago when Trump was elected. Another surprise was that this was predicted by Michael Moore. Btw Moore is again warning not to count our chickens before they hatch.

What then arose was a need to explain this. After a little research I thought I had discovered reasonable explanations:

1. The elephant curve, that middle America was either making no progress or going backwards economically. They were angry and voted for an angry outsider from the political establishment, Trump.
2. The Democrat candidate, Hilary, was a pathetic self serving liberal who promoted identity politics and eschewed class politics.

At the time I felt Michael Hudson was on the right track in calling for a break up of the Democratic Party. His analysis, along with the late David Graeber, identified the central problem that both Parties were and are captive to Wall Street.

Over those four years as a casual, part time observer of American politics I felt those two explanations were sufficient to explain what was going on.

Four years later, is there a need to update this analysis? I have been searching and now think I know a little more.

Russia gate, based on flimsy evidence, was a failure of the Democrats to face the main reason why they lost, namely that their candidate and policies served the elite and would not improve the situation of middle America.

BLM is a race based movement with some legitimate claims but does not clearly identify the key issue in America, namely, the dire economic situation of the growing precariat.

China. Niall Ferguson, when interviewed by Coleman Hughes, identified the main good thing that Trump has done: clearly identified China as a real and growing danger to the world

Joe Biden is in cognitive decline and his political history shows he is either a scumbag (eg. with regard to the whistle blowers Snowden and Assange) or a non entity. The Democrats could have appointed a moderate reformer like Bernie Sanders. They chose not to which indicates they have learnt nothing new of value over the past 4 years.

The Lincoln Project, Republicans who are anti Trump, do make occasional entertaining videos but are dishonest in the way they promote Biden.

Institutions such as the New York Times and Universities have by and large been taken over by the woke movement who believe such things as:

• Democrats lost last time because of Russian interference
• Russia remains an existential threat to US democracy
• Free speech has some importance but anti racism is far more important
• Only fascists, nazis, white supremists, terrorists and racists support Trump
• Assange belongs in prison because he helped Trump last time

Now the social media giants (twitter, facebook) have yielded to the pressure and are censoring their feed in support of Biden. The fearless, free press, where is it?

The culture war against a main stream media that has long stopped trying to tell the truth will have to go on whoever wins the election.

There are people in America, outside the main stream media, who make sense to me. I describe them as just informed citizens, of varying political allegiance, who have the blinkers off, are passionate about finding the truth and have growing numbers of supporters. Here are some of their names: Michael Hudson, Glen Loury, Coleman Hughes, John McWhorter, Glen Greenwald, Niall Ferguson, Matt Taibbi, Joe Rogan

The current choice, in the words of Matt Taibbi and Katie Halper, is between one bowl of shit and two bowls of shit. Coleman Hughes is supporting Joe Biden since he feels it might lead to a less deranged left wing as opposed to a more deranged left wing (if Trump wins). Take your pick.

If you think the above is on the right track and want to hear it better argued then watch this interview of Glen Greenwald by Joe Rogan:

Watch this video about George Floyd's death

Watch this video about George Floyd's death, to the end: George Floyd, the Law, and the Absolute Necessity of Due Process

update Oct 13
I wrote below, "if we base our knowledge on a brief snapshot combined with a blinkered or incomplete view of how the world works then we are bound to get it wrong"

Unfortunately, this is what I did. When I look again at the original bystander video it is very clear that Derek Chauvin callously rejected, for 4 minutes, the repeated advice of spectators after George Floyd lost consciousness. This is ignored in the pro cop video.

One of the spectators who identifies as having trained at the police academy repeatedly calls out (supported by other voices) he’s not resisting … you’re stopping his breathing … various comments about what sort of person Derek Chauvin is, your a bum etc … he’s not responding right now (after GF loses consciousness) … check his pulse … the man ain’t moving …. he’s not moving (in the middle of this Chauvin takes his hand out of his pocket and grabs his mace to threaten the spectators) …. get off his neck … you gonna let him kill that man (to the other police).

George Floyd is unconscious for 4 minutes before the ambulance arrives and then Chauvin takes his knee off Geoge Floyd's neck. Here is the link to the original bystander video: Full cell phone video of George Floyd Police Incident (complete video)

update Oct 6:
When I saw the original video I saw (along with the rest of the world) a callous cop, not threatened himself (hand in his pocket), brutally killing Floyd. But the new video shows the following:

• cops doing their job by the book, including knee on the neck
• knee being lifted at times by the cop
• Floyd saying "I can't breathe" repeatedly before he had the knee on his neck
• Floyd being continually uncooperative and acting as though he had taken something
• Floyd admitting he was on drugs
• Police calling ambulance twice
• subsequent documentation that he had taken enough fentanyl to kill himself
• much of this was hushed up for months

All of this has significant epistemological and political implications, eg. if we base our knowledge on a brief snapshot combined with a blinkered or incomplete view of how the world works then we are bound to get it wrong

The Hippocratic oath of activism: First educate yourself.

update Oct 8:
Read: George Floyd autopsy report, with cause of death and other factors

This comment at the YouTube site by Staff Reporter is consistent with my reading of the autopsy report:

This documentary does not go far enough and question why on the final autopsy, the hospital personnel inserted 2 chest tubes for drainage, a trach for breathing, 2 IO Catheters which are contraindicated for heart patients. Floyd had 4 major occlusions in his heart, 2 of which in the same blood vessel. He also had an IV Catheter taped to the left side of his groin and a needle puncture mark seeming to indicate that he died before they could make the incision to perform an angiogram for stent placements.

Also, his lungs were inflamed and edematous, because he had tested Covid positive and now we know hooping, which could mean he was shooting baskets or this can apparently mean he shoved crystal meth in his anus (ass), either in solid form or dissolved in water, resulting in a quick and intense high according to the urban dictionary. However, the final autopsy notes "the back, buttock and anus are unremarkable." Drug hooping can, but not always, result in irritation of the anus. Thus the benefit of the doubt goes to the officers.

There were no signs of asphyxiation, meaning no blood clots in the tissues, no petechiae hemorrhaging and no bruising. The neck and larynx were structurally intact as well.

Remember an hour and twenty four minutes passed from the time of the 911 call at 8:01 p.m. until the time of death was called at the hospital at 9:25 p.m. Clearly enough time to perform all of the above medical procedures and why they are documented in the final autopsy.

the contrarian black and white voices matter

Update (July 15):
More shocks:
Bari Weiss resignation letter from the New York Times.

James Flynn's (known for the 'Flynn effect') book on free speech has been pulled by the publisher.
/update

My poor imitation of a Dylan line goes like this: How many contrarians need to speak out before their voices are heard?

In the wake of a just cause (anti racism) we witness the cancer of anti racism religion, the woke cancel culture.

Now they are trying to cancel Steven Pinker. I'm shocked by the depths of their stupidity. As Jim said, "How childish ... Wittgenstein doesn’t have enough middle fingers for them."

The cancel attempt is here.

There is a great rebuttal here.

I say that the contrarian black voices matter because when I did not understand what was happening in America I searched and found coherent analysis from them.

I'm referring to Glen Loury (twitter), John McWhorter (twitter), Coleman Hughes (twitter) as well as Killer Mike (video) and rapper Lupe Fiasco (video). Read and listen to these guys if you really want to understand what is happening in America with regard to race.

So, which slogan should I support. "Black Lives Matter" or "All Lives Matter". I think Steven Pinker has explained this better than anyone:

Linguists, of all people, should understand the difference between a trope or collocation, such as the slogan “All lives matter,” and the proposition that all lives matter. (Is someone prepared to argue that some lives don’t matter?) And linguists, of all people, should understand the difference between a turn in the context of a conversational exchange and a sentence that expresses an idea. It’s true that if someone were to retort “All lives matter” in direct response to “Black lives matter,’ they’d be making a statement that downplays the racism and other harms suffered by African Americans. But that is different from asking questions about whom police kill, being open to evidence on the answer, and seeking to reduce the number of innocent people killed by the police of all races. The fact is that Mullainathan and four other research reports have found the same thing: while there’s strong evidence that African Americans are disproportionately harassed, frisked, and manhandled by the police (so racism among the police is a genuine problem), there’s no evidence that they are killed more, holding rates of dangerous encounters constant. (References below.) As Mullainathan notes, this doesn’t downplay racism, but it pinpoints its effects: in drug laws, poverty, housing segregation, and other contributors to being in dangerous situations, but not on in the behavior of police in lethal encounters. And it has implications for how to reduce police killings, which is what we should all care about: it explains the finding that race-specific like training police in implicit bias and hiring more minority police have no effect, while across-the-board measures such as de-escalation training, demilitarization, changing police culture, and increasing accountability do have an effect.
(follow the link to The Purity Posse pursues Pinker to see the 6 references listed)

So, yes, the contrarian white voices matter too.

Related:
A Letter on Justice and Open Debate A statement signed by 150 people incl. Noam Chomsky, J.K. Rowling, Margaret Atwood, Garry Kasparov, Steven Pinker, Gloria Steinem, John McWhorter, Coleman Hughes and Salman Rushdie expresses concern over the illiberal trend intensified by our national reckoning

My Enlightenment fanaticism by Scott Aaronson

covid-19 Inspiring Black Rights Matter Protest Long discussion thread in which I became involved, attempting to assess the true nature of the Black Lives Matter protests.

The Hippocratic oath of activism: First educate yourself

Coleman Hughes argues that the Black Lives Matter movement is based on a half truth. True that the police treat blacks worse. Not true that they murder disproportionately more blacks than whites. The videos where the police murder whites don't go viral. The problem with the police is corruption (not being independently investigated) not disproportionate murder of black people:

YouTube link: The Same Drugs: Coleman Hughes on race, racism, police violence, and Black Lives Matter.

Ok, it's 45 minutes, but well worth it to find out what is actually happening, rather than relying on mainstream media, which likes to highlight the conflagration, looting etc.

"The Hippocratic oath of activism: First educate yourself"