Back to the Middle Ages

Many of us have become convinced that Trump and his Republican worshipers are leading us back into the Middle Ages, at least in terms of attitude, particularly the denial of science and the hostility toward non-white people.

But it appears that some Trump supporters are also going back to medieval beliefs in witches and evil spirits which, of course, they believe are living in the bodies of Democrats and attacking Republicans. The leader of Women for Trump Amy Kremer attributed the attacks on Brett Kavanaugh as being motivated by a hex placed on him by presumably Democratic witches. Here is a link to the Newsweek article about what she said October 14 on MSNBC.

Will we see a return to witch-hunts and burning at the stake for all the infidels who will not worship Trump? Presumably not; we might assume that people like Amy Kramer are speaking figuratively. But she did not say that it was a figure of speech! Given that the Republican Party has done things that even three years ago seemed unimaginable, we cannot rule out the possibility of the return of medieval mobs.

Cynicism for Fun, Health, and Profit, part six: War

In his 2012 book The End of War, John Horgan explained that it is really possible for humankind to bring all war to an end. Of course, he did not consider this to be very likely. Here is a quote that indicates that there could be an end to all war, if the United States decided to seek this goal. But it is also extremely unlikely that the United States will ever do this:

“We claim to revere peace and human rights—and yet we keep embarking on unnecessary wars, in which we treat alleged enemies and even civilians cruelly. We pay lip service to the principles of national sovereignty and international law while secretly carrying out deadly commando raids and drone attacks around the world. We sell weapons to other nations, and to their adversaries. We prop up dictators if they let us build military bases on their land, exploit their cheap labor, or sell us their oil and other resources at low prices. We are guilty of shameless hypocrisy. If we practiced what we preached—if we showed through our actions that we recognize how wrong war is—we Americans could lead the entire world to an enduring peace.”

This was back during the Obama administration. Things are even worse now under Trump who is best known for antagonizing even our allies. It is clear to everyone that we will never stop selling arms to dictators and terrorists, even when these arms come back to take aim at us. America profits—or, at least the American corporations who control the federal government profit—from keeping the world on the brink of war.

War in Yemen, 2018, from New York Times

This is yet another part of a cynical viewpoint of life, but one that can allow us to be healthy and happy. We need to simply accept the fact that the world will never embrace peace and prosperity, and then make preparations for living as well as possible despite this fact. I can’t do anything about the world, but just about my own life, work, and relationships.

Cynicism for Fun, Health, and Profit, part five. The Political Cynic.

I grew up hearing about the lofty ideals of democracy, as enshrined in the American Constitution. I grew up thinking that politicians were actually statesmen who really wanted to do the right thing for their fellow citizens, who entrusted them with leadership. As incredible as it may sound, I actually believed this when I was a kid. It was not hard to feel this way. I first became aware of the world during the administration of John Fitzgerald Kennedy. I remember where I was when the news of his assassination was broadcast. I was a first-grader, who heard it from the sixth-graders in my elementary school. I ran home for lunch and my mom confirmed the news. In upcoming years, I listened to recordings of Kennedy’s speeches, and they were very stirring. “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.” That’s the most famous line. But even better is this one: “Here on Earth, God’s work must truly be our own.” His assassination made me revere political leaders even more, since the official story (which nobody really believes anymore) was that the assassination was entirely conceived by a deranged man named Lee Harvey Oswald.

And I still revere Kennedy, even though revelations have come out since his death about some bad things he did, such as cheating on his wife. Even during the Vietnam War, I trusted our politicians to be telling the truth that North Vietnamese communism really was a threat to world peace and that we had to stop it, sort of, advance and retreat, advance and retreat, in which corporations that supplied the military got very rich over a war that seemed to never end and which was supported by an endless supply of federal dollars and conscripted lives.

Then came Watergate. I had been enthusiastic about Nixon, and I felt betrayed. I felt good about Gerald Ford, who took his place (the only president to not have been elected), because he projected an image of being clean. He said, “The national nightmare is over.” In Japan, which I visited about the time Ford took office, they referred to Gerald Ford as “Mr. Clean,” because Ford did resemble a little bit the white white white janitor on the cleaning supply boxes and bottles.

The presidency of Jimmy Carter was almost boring because of its lack of scandal. To this day, Carter remains about the only clean politician of which most of us can think. Then came Ronald Reagan, who inspired everyone with his words, but then did whatever the hell he wanted to, whether it was legal or not. He sold armaments to Iran, whom he had labeled an enemy of freedom, in order to get money to supply to “Contra” terrorists in Nicaragua so that they could kill civilians. Reagan once said, “I don’t like having to consult a committee of 545 every time I want to do something.” This committee, of course, was Congress, and he was required to obey them by this little tiny document that you may have heard of, the Constitution.

The rest of the story you probably know. I have filled in the 1960s through 1980s for my younger readers. Particularly noteworthy was the administration of George W. Bush, which was so filled with conservative corruption that John W. Dean (a Republican and Watergate whistleblower) wrote a book about it, Conservatives without Conscience. (Donald Trump recently called Dean a rat.)

It is even worse today. Not just the corruption, which we have always had, except for brief shining Camelot moments. But today the powerful conservatives are leading America in a direction of totalitarianism, and even a revival of respect for Nazis. Dean quotes Professor Bob Altemeyer: “If you think [the United States] could never elect an Adolf Hitler to power, note that [Nazi sympathizer] David Duke would have become governor of Louisiana if it had just been up to the white voters in that state.” White supremacist Richard Spencer was taken seriously by Steve Bannon, who was the national security advisor for Donald Trump. Trump said that the white supremacists in Charlottesville and the diverse people who protested against them both deserved equal respect and equal blame, even though the only person killed was a young woman, by a car driven very fast into a crowd by a white supremacist. Trump said that the Congressmen who had not clapped for him at his State of the Union address were committing“treason.”  The link is to the Telegraph, a U.K. newspaper, to show that Trump’s outrageous statement was taken seriously overseas.

In the political arena, then, it appears that the facts support a cynical point of view on the national level. On the state level (I live in Oklahoma), the legislature for a long time refused to allow public school teachers to receive a living wage, and instead of trying to solve the state’s fiscal crisis, they spend their time trying to enact creationist laws. The purpose of the state of Oklahoma, they think, is to make oil companies more profitable, even if it means the poverty and disease of the state residents. Is it any different in your state? Probably not.

I think I have made my point: cynicism is the only realistic summary of the political world. There is probably nothing you can reasonably imagine that can even come close to the reality of that world, only a little bit of whose corruption is visible to outsiders.

Clearly, the momentum of politics right now is toward Trump demanding, and getting, personal adoration. And slightly fewer than half of Americans are eager to give it to Him.

But we can’t stop on such a depressing note. Otherwise you will be exactly like the miserable man I described in an earlier essay. But knowledge is power. As a cynic, you know that politics is thoroughly corrupt. The practical result is that you know it is hopeless, utterly hopeless, to try to solve any of our major problems by working through existing political channels. At least, cynicism can keep you from wasting a lot of time and resources, only to get your heart stomped into a quivering mass of protoplasm on the Rotunda floor. Find something else to do to make the world better. But, as a good cynic, you should not expect any of your efforts to make a difference in the end.

This will leave you lots of time to do things that make the world better and that you enjoy. I mean, WWGCD? What would George Carlin do? Take, for example, the fact that Trump used a ceremony that supposedly honored the Navaho Code Talkers as a chance to insult both liberals and Native Americans by calling Elizabeth Warren “Pocahontas” and by holding the ceremony right underneath the portrait of Andrew Jackson, the president who broke the law in order to steal Native American land in the 1830s. What can you do in the face of such an insult from the highest office in the land? Humor, of course. A political cartoonist depicted a Native American saying to Trump, “You could learn a thing or two from us. We know how to run casinos that don’t go bankrupt.”

Incredible Events of the Past

In an old book, I ran across an account of the Chase Vault in the cemetery of Christ Church, on the island of Barbados. It seems that, beginning in 1807, recently deceased people began to be interred in that vault. At first nothing unusual happened. But then a young woman committed suicide, and her remains were interred in the vault. The next time the vault was opened, all the coffins had been thrown around as if by an incredible force, even though the island had experienced no earthquakes and there was no sign of damage on the inner walls, the outer walls, or the surrounding part of the cemetery. The cemetery workers put the coffins back in their places, and interred the next coffin. The next time the vault was opened, the coffins were again found strewn about. This time, after the coffins were rearranged and the new coffin interred, the workers placed sand and ashes carefully and smoothly on the floor. The next time the vault was opened, and the coffins were again strewn about, there was no disturbance in the ashes. Superstitious people believed that ghosts, who leave no footprints, had thrown the coffins around, perhaps the uneasy ghost of the woman who took her own life. The church ordered the coffins to be buried elsewhere and the crypt left open.

The evidence for the ghost tantrum seemed good. The ashes on the floor would have revealed the activity of marauding humans or animals. This was, in fact, the same trick that Daniel used in the apocryphal book Bel and the Dragon to prove that the pagan priests had used a secret trap door to sneak into the altar and eat the food, pretending that the god Bel had eaten it. Daniel threw some flour on the floor, and the priests left footprints in the flour, which they could not see in the dark.

But there is one flaw to the story of the tantrum ghosts of Barbados. There is no primary documentation of it. The vault began to be used in 1807, and has been empty for over a century. The priest supposedly wrote a record of the events, but this putative record burned in a church fire. The Journal of the Barbados Museum and Historical Society carried an account of the marauding ghost in May, 1945, over a century after the supposed events. Quite simply, today, nobody can be sure if the stories were real. No other accounts of the marauding ghost have survived, if they ever existed.

The reason I am writing this essay is to draw a comparison with the gospel accounts of the Resurrection of Jesus. The evidence for the Resurrection seemed pretty good. A stone was rolled over the opening of Jesus’ tomb, and Roman guards kept watch over it. Supposedly angels made the guards faint and then rolled the stone away, and Jesus came walking out. The stone and the guards gave considerable credibility to the account.

The problem is that the Resurrection account seems to have first been written down long after the supposed event. It is not found in the earliest Christian writings. For example, the earliest version of the earliest gospel (Mark) did not contain it. Mark 16: 9-20 were added later, at a time when any eyewitnesses would have been dead. Quite simply, as with the marauding ghosts, nobody today can be sure if the stories were real. No other accounts of the resurrection have survived, if they ever existed. One might have expected a Roman military record of it, since it would have been a major breach of military control if it happened.

It is clear that the earliest Christians believed that Jesus was alive. They said so. But that does not mean that his body actually came forth from the tomb. They may have believed Jesus’ continued existence to be a spiritual one. Disciples walked on the Emmaus Road with a man whom they did not recognize until after he had left, and then they decided it must have been Jesus. Jesus appeared inside a locked room. None of these sound like a physical resurrection, but may have been visions or delusions that reflected a deeper faith rather than evidence that would convince a skeptic.

You can believe Jesus is alive if you want to, but do not call me a liar for disbelieving the supposed evidence of the resurrection just as I disbelieve the evidence for the tantrum ghost of Barbados. Whether Jesus is alive or not is, to me, a spiritual question.

Cynicism for Fun, Health, and Profit, part four. Protect Yourself from Road Rage

Many drivers in America carry guns and are often willing to use them in road rage shootings. According to this article, there were 1,319 road rage shootings from 2014 to 2016. This resulted in 354 people being wounded and 136 being killed. The rate seems to be increasing, from 247 in 2014 to 620 in 2016. Official statistics do not keep separate record of road rage incidents; these numbers were gleaned from published reports by the organization that published the above article.

These numbers are low compared to the population as a whole. Do not fall into the half-full half-empty trap, telling yourself that, any time you use your car, there is less than a 50 percent chance that you will be the victim of road rage. Over time, the odds accumulate that you might be a victim. The figures are large enough to justify thoughtful and continual precaution while driving.

Moreover, the number of road rage gun incidents is under-reported. I know this for a fact because one of my students told me of an incident in which an enraged driver followed another and shot his car. The incident, not involving any injury, went unreported.

One reason they often go unreported is that the victim may place him or herself at risk of further attack. A policeman once told me that a man at a stop sign got out of his car and used a baseball bat to smash the windshield of the car behind. The victim started to report it, but the police discouraged the victim from taking action. The reason is that, if you report or sue someone who commits violence against you, your name and address become a matter of public record, and the perp may track you down. You lose the protection of anonymity.

One way, you might think, to get around the problem of revealing your identity to the attacker is to let your insurance company pursue a suit against the attacker. However, this will not work: before an insurance company can act, they need a police report, which contains your personal information and to which the attacker may also have access.

Statistically, you are unlikely to be injured or killed by road rage. But the numbers are great enough to justify a cynic’s wariness: if there is a pickup truck nearby, you can assume the driver is armed and angry, and you should take precautions. Under no circumstances should you make that driver angry or angrier.

From an online search, I found a story about a road rage shooting in France. See, they aren’t all in America. But the article was published in 2013. America stands out among industrialized countries in the frequency of road rage.

Cynicism for Fun, Health, and Profit, part three. More Cynicism for Drivers

In 2016, 27,461 Americans died in traffic fatalities, which is about 11.6 per 100,000 population. This number is actually lower than in most previous years, going all the way back to the beginning of the twentieth century. Many of these deaths were caused by other drivers. The world average is 17.4 fatalities per 100,000 people. The American traffic fatality rate is almost exactly double that of France (5.1 fatalities per 100,000). In both America and France, traffic fatalities would be vastly reduced if cautious people were cynics. Wait four seconds, not just two. That’s all it takes. I was always a little annoyed at Tulsa drivers, who would not move for four seconds when the light turned green. After my experience, I have become one of them.

I share now some further thoughts about cynicism and driving. This is important, since so many of us spend so much time doing it.

Guys who drive big trucks are more likely to demolish small cars, and their drivers, than are other motorists. There are several reasons for this.

• First, I refer primarily to guys in big trucks. Gals are a little more cautious, and a little more thoughtful about other people. This is because, in general, women are more empathetic than men. This is not a fundamental difference, but a difference of degree.
• Second, the driver of a big pickup truck has a sense of invulnerability. Many big pickup trucks have lots of defensive armor, such as deer-catchers on the front, and the cabin of the truck is much further above ground level than that of the typical automobile. A big pickup truck really can run into and over almost any other vehicle with little risk of harm to the truck or driver. My previous car was demolished by a pickup backing up at full speed into the road. The damage resulted entirely from the hitch at the back of the pickup, which was not even scratched. This sense of invulnerability is part of the psychology of most guys in pickups. I notice that, where I live, many houses have lots of unrelated people living together, since they cannot afford to each live in their own place. This is because they are poor. But why are they poor? Outside of many of these houses—I can think of three such houses in the half mile near where I work—several pickup trucks are parked. I have checked the prices of pickup trucks, and each of these trucks costs about as much as my house and property are worth, here in rural Oklahoma. They cannot afford a good place to live because they spend their money on a truck instead. It seems to me that, here in rural Oklahoma, there are many shacks that could easily blow away in a wind storm; the residents could tie their shack down to their pickup truck to save it.
• Third, by looking down on us, they often feel superior. They feel that this gives them the freedom to proclaim their superiority. Where I live, it is not uncommon to see Confederate insignia on trucks. For a while, when we had a black president, several trucks displayed full-sized Confederate flags from struts that took up the entire truck bed.
• Fourth, by driving a big truck, these drivers feel that they really own the road. The rest of us have to move to the side for them, whether they are in our lane or in the oncoming lane. This would simply not happen in, for example, France, where the roads are too small. I saw two pickup trucks, both small, in France. One was broken down and used to store firewood. The other was very old. While French drivers are not noted for their courtesy, they at least have less dangerous weapons to use against other drivers. According to counts that I have kept (though the study is ongoing), patrolmen pull over cars disproportionately often in comparison with how common they are, compared to pickup trucks. In rural Oklahoma, about one-third of vehicles are big pickup trucks, but I have not yet seen one of them pulled over during my study period. They seem to own the road here in Oklahoma, with official approval.
• Finally, many drivers, especially those of pickups, assume that you have no momentum. They assume that you can stop for them in literally no time at all. Part of their feeling of invulnerability is to think themselves exempt from the laws of physics. “Stopping distance” is not just a good idea; it’s a law of nature. The cynic assumes that other drivers do not even know the simplest laws of physics.

None of these things needs to be a conscious decision on the part of the pickup driver. They do, however, make these assumptions, even without intending harm.

I have long made the assumption that drivers of commercial trucks are very cautious and are unlikely to do anything that might put other drivers at risk. This is because their trucks are well marked, and the company that sponsors the drivers (even if they are owner-operators) can get sued as a result of the truck drivers’ negligence. I still believe that this assumption is largely correct, although some people who know truck drivers tell me that my optimism is frequently unwarranted.

I also drive with my lights on (the driving lights, not full headlights) even in the day, in order to increase my chances of being seen. I also drive with my right hand ready to honk, and my left ready to flash my bright lights. While I have only had to use these tactics three times in the past year, it might have saved my life.

I also sometimes use my flashers. Usually, flashers indicate that the vehicle is going significantly under the speed limit. But where I live, almost everybody speeds. If I am driving merely at the speed limit, in dense traffic, I often use my flashers, since to the other drivers I represent a slow-moving hazard. I do this infrequently and only in dense, rapid traffic.

As a cynical driver, I find it nearly impossible, except on a lonely roadway with few other drivers, to relax and enjoy the drive. I have to be constantly alert, anticipating the possible recklessness of other drivers.

The Jesus Algorithm

Evangelical Christians claim to love Jesus. But to them, Jesus is not a person. He is an algorithm.

An algorithm is a formula or computer code that controls something that happens, for example, that determines what the computer does. It has a certain function, and is valued just for that function. The algorithm certainly cannot decide for itself what to do.

To evangelicals, Jesus has just one function. He forgives sins. You are a sinner, they say, and what you need to do is to press control alt J to activate the Jesus algorithm. If you say the right words, all of your sins are totally forgiven, but if you do not, you are damned. Jesus himself has no say in the matter, any more than a computer does. If you are a good person, who obeys the Golden Rule, and truly loves other people, that does not matter. Jesus is not permitted to forgive or save you. And if you use control alt J, Jesus must forgive you even if he sees into your heart and knows that you are going to just go and do the sinful act again. To evangelicals, Jesus has no intelligence or personality. You have leeway for judgment. Jesus does not.

This is why Donald Trump is the darling of evangelicals despite his numerous, large, and ongoing sins. He uses the algorithm, or maybe has an intern do it for him.

It gets worse. Evangelicals (particularly the televangelists) fantasize that they have exclusive access to the keyboard. A Democrat cannot slip in and press control alt J. If you are a Democrat, you are damned, and there is nothing you can do about it. Republicans, on the other hand, have unlimited access to the keyboard. In fact, most of them seem to have special Cheap Grace apps on their phones that repents of their sins every ten microseconds, so that before they even realized they have sinned, they have asked forgiveness, which God is obligated to give. (Cheap Grace is a term invented by theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer, to refer to this kind of thoughtless repentance that does not cost anything in your life. Back in the 1970s, when I was an evangelical, we all respected Bonhoeffer, whom the Nazis executed. I guess evangelicals don’t do that anymore.)

And God? He’s totally out of the picture. He has given all of his authority to Jesus, who is completely under the control of the evangelicals.

I greatly admire, and love, the Jesus who said “Behold the lilies of the field...even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed as one of these” and “Ask not what your country can do for you...” Oh, wait, that second one was John F. Kennedy. I think I would really enjoy knowing Jesus, if only the evangelicals did not keep him in a box like a veal calf and prevent him from having any personality.