A Merry-go-Round Trilogy
This photo is a microcosm of what most Americans realize is perhaps a fatal flaw in America's democracy. The trio depicted above are Fox News anchors Chris Wallace, Megyn Kelly, and Bret Baier. Tonight they will host yet another Republican debate, this time in a presidential-wannabee field cut from 17 down to four. The first time this trio hosted such a debate they did what they do regularly on their "news" programs -- which is to try to destroy Republican front-runner Donald Trump in order to propel their sanitized Marco Rubio to the forefront. Megyn Kelly, in particular, is unabashedly a lover of Rubio, which in turn makes her an unabashed hater of Trump. Her very first now famous question in Fox's first debate, and the ones that followed, were specially choreographed time-bombs for Trump and soft-balls for choir-boy Rubio. Expect the same tonight. Ms. Kelly gained so much fame and notoriety from her trumping of Trump in the first Fox debate that she has now signed a very lucrative book deal. In fact, during a seemingly endless campaign marathon, the prime purpose of the debates seems to be how much money the networks can make from advertising dollars. An important secondary purpose is to propagandize the Rubio candidacy, a clear priority of right-wing Fox, left-wing MSNBC, and middle-of-the-road CNN. With such unanimity of the three cable pundit-driven propaganda machines, it would seem that Rubio would have a clear-shot to the White House, considering he is lavishly funded by most of the right-wing, conservative, and Jewish big-money billionaires as well as almost every one of the so-called "establishment" Republicans, including a notably rich Republican presidential loser Mitt Romney, who made a widely covered and scathing denunciation of Trump in a well-orchestrated speech this morning.
Understand, as a lifelong Republican, I do not think Donald Trump, a billionaire businessman, is qualified to be America's President. But I, and apparently millions of others, believe Trump is far better than the alternatives the Republican party is promoting, especially the two Cuban-Americans -- Rubio and Cruz -- who belittle the fact that there are a million or more qualified, non-extremists, and non-bought-and-paid-for Cuban-Americans who can't get elected to national office because of the fact they are not extremists and not bought-and-paid-for. Also, the Trump phenomenon represents two facets of a troubled American democracy: {1} Americans, bless their hearts, are fed-up with bought-and-paid-for politicians, and {2} Americans, to their credit, are also fed-up with a biased, pundit-driven media that has mostly evolved into a vast propaganda machine, one that reflects the fact that the major media outlets are all owned by billionaire individuals and corporations who insist on buying up what is left of a two-party democracy.
AND SO, the Trump vs. Rubio menagerie in the Republican presidential farce is clear-cut: MOST VOTERS ARE SUPPORTING TRUMP FOR ONE REASON ONLY: THEY FEEL THAT, AS A SELF-FUNDER, HE IS NOT BOUGHT-AND-PAID-FOR. On the other hand, most greedy and undemocratic billionaires lavishly favor Rubio because it is abundantly clear that he has the biggest for sale sign on both his back and chest than any serious presidential candidate in America's history. {Also, such things as respected journalist Ken Silverstein's long and detailed article that concludes that Rubio is the most corrupt presidential candidate in American history merely adds to his attraction to billionaire donors who certainly prefer a corrupt, bought-and-paid-for Senator or President than one they might not control, such as a Trump; and, of course, the networks just sanitize Rubio}. So, study the Trump vs. Rubio montage above: You have an unqualified, billionaire candidate vs. a bought-and-paid-for establishment candidate. So, you have to choose the lesser of two evils. Most, at least at the moment, are choosing Trump because he is less bought-and-paid-for.
The photo above is courtesy of Stephen Crowley/The New York Times. It shows a microcosm of the fallout of this week's "SUPER TUESDAY" primary elections in a dozen U. S. states. It also reveals that America's hallowed democracy is in trouble, DEEP TROUBLE. And, yes, that affects all the nations of the world because of America's status as the maligned planet's military and economy superpower. The U. S. democracy was constructed by the Founding Fathers as a two-party government and the greatest democracy, which also means the greatest government, in history. The two-party system, with some exceptions, worked wonderfully for about 230 years, powered by a one-person, one-vote mantra. But then one political party and soon the other became bought-and-paid-for by rich individuals and by rich corporations. So now, beyond doubt, the greatest democracies in the world -- although not superpowers -- are the Scandinavian nations -- Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Switzerland, and Finland. That's because they have referendum-type democracies in which all important decisions are put in the hands of the voters on a one-person and one-vote mandate, called referendums. Yes, those democracies have extremely high taxes, but they are set by referendums that reflect exactly what the people want, and those high taxes are returned with free items such as education through college, universal health care, and even gratuities such as 30-day/all-paid/world-wide vacations, and even regular government-paid gifts such as...the best and biggest television sets. That's why, even when nations like the U. S. paid for them, polls show those five nations, in various orders, are usually in the Top Five for things such as The Happiest People In The World, The Healthiest People In The World, The Best Educated People In The World, The Most Democratic People In The World (remember those one-person, one-vote referendums), The Safest People In The World, etc., etc. At one point, America led most of those categories. No longer. The ongoing, agonizing presidential election process illustrates why our democracy has evolved into a money-crazed disaster.
Thomas Jefferson's 1816 advice about his precious American democracy falling into the hands of "LENDING INSTITUTIONS AND MONEYED INCORPORTIONS" has come to pass. To pusillanimously deny that fact will not correct it. The last nail in democracy's coffin came in 2010 when the Supreme Court legalized unlimited political donations by billionaire individuals and corporations. Unpatriotic, cowardly Americans since that ruling have allowed Mr. Jefferson's sage warning to go unheeded. After two post-World War II generations of undemocratic and cowardly Americans, it should be noted that a new young-adult generation is trying desperately to heed Mr. Jefferson's version of America's democracy. That fact is reflected in the young-adult support of Bernie Sanders and the broad support of Donald Trump, support based on the fact that millions of Americans are fed-up with "established, bought-and-paid-for" politicians.
Thomas Jefferson's fear of tyranny by a 51% majority against the 49% minority was extremely legitimate. But I don't believe even the wisdom and foresight of Thomas Jefferson ever anticipated what we now have: A mere 1% of Americans, the greedy billionaires, taking away the rights of the other 99%. On the day this week after the "SUPER TUESDAY" voting, one of the cable news networks spent an hour spieling about billionaires like Hedge Fund "genius" Paul Singer talking about how much money they would spend to, essentially, buy up the U. S. democracy so they could put their bought-and-paid-for candidates in the White House to match the predominant bought-and-paid-for members of the U. S. Congress. Thomas Jefferson, if he had lived long enough to see it, would have, I believe, cried. He, unlike many Americans, would have been smart enough to understand that the U. S. television networks, which now are the prime propaganda outlets, are all owned in the U. S. by billion-dollar individuals and corporations. And, fueled by limitless greed, it is in their financial interest to make their television network news divisions nothing more and nothing less than propaganda machines as opposed to news sources.
Democracy in America was never intended to be dominated by the richest Americans dictating to the vast majority of Americans who happen not to be filthy rich in a nation in which inherited or ill-acquired wealth can beget more and more wealth, all the better to acquire more-and-more of the U. S. democracy.
The U. S. democracy was meant to be a one-person, one-vote form of government.
Alexis de Tocqueville was born and died in France {1805-1859}. He's emblematic of many foreigners intrigued and enthralled by America's experiment in democracy. As a young man he spent nine months in the U. S. sharing the democratic experience with Americans. He then wrote two volumes of "DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA" that were published in 1835 and 1840, lovingly explaining the meaning of democracy to what became his worldwide audience. He seemed to realize the fragility of democracy, especially as it concerned Congress, one of its three pillars along with the judiciary and the presidency. In particular, he worried that an unsavory congressman could be elected from a tiny, dysfunctional, and perhaps corrupt region but once in Congress could enact laws to personally raid the Treasury and even mandate laws for revenge or personal gain. Tocqueville's amazing prescience and astuteness regarding democracy foreshadowed today's bought-and-paid-for U. S. Congress. He also foreshadowed, I think, Mario Diaz-Balart {son of a former Minister in Cuba's vile Batista dictatorship} reaching Congress from Miami, just as his brother had done, and then being able to slip a bill into a must-pass, veto-proof bill that greatly hurt Cuba and stymied President Obama's efforts to correct some of Congress's Cuban madness. Also, I think, Tocqueville foreshadowed Marco Rubio reaching Congress from Miami and then, all alone, being able to block sane government policy related to Cuba, such as Rubio's blocking Roberta Jacobson's appointment as Ambassador to Mexico because she negotiated a sane and decent U. S. policy regarding Cuba. {Every observer other than anti-Cuban Cuban-American zealots believe Jacobson is the perfect person to fill the very important ambassadorship to Mexico}. Beyond all that prescience and foreshadowing, Tocqueville fully realized that democracy, most of all, depended on patriotic, brave, and informed citizens. He would undoubtedly realize today that those three characteristics are missing in present-day Americans, revealing the frailty of democracy as illustrated by the fact that a few extremist Cuban-Americans can mandate Cuban-related laws that the majority of Cuban-Americans and all Americans have no power to influence...and, indeed, as Tocqueville predicted, democracy would "endure" only till Congress realized it could "bribe the public with the public's money," which it surely has done for decades in regards to daily shipments of tax dollars to anti-Castro stalwarts in Miami and to lavishly fund regime-change Cuban programs. Tocqueville didn't predict that the U. S. democracy in the 1950s would support the Batista-Mafia dictatorship in Cuba and then support it in the U. S. once it was overthrown in Cuba. But, having studied Tocqueville, I feel certain he would agree that Cuba says a lot more about the U. S. than it says about Cuba.
Tocqueville knew the dangers represented by greedy, rich Americans.
Cuba personifies America's inability to "repair her faults."
The French and American revolutions preceded Cuba's Revolution.
Both Jefferson and Tocqueville believed in revolutions.
Jefferson was not only America's third president but, among many other things, he wrote the Declaration of Independence after the world-changing revolutionary victory over England. His belief that every "generation needs a new revolution" echoes today's mantra as espoused by, among others, Bernie Sanders. But in the end, such democracy-loving wishful thinking will be overwhelmed yet again by a political system that was too fragile to withstand being purchased and demolished by greedy billionaires.
Our democracy in distress looks more-and-more like a Batista-style Banana Republic with each passing day. For example, there are well over a million Cuban-Americans who would improve our democracy if they could get elected to the U. S. Congress and/or the White House. But...and I think Tocqueville and Jefferson would agree...only extremist, money-crazed, bought-and-paid-for Cuban-Americans can get elected to national office in America. If you go back and study the Tocqueville and Jefferson quotations listed above, or their many other pertinent observations and predictions related to America's fragile democracy, I think you'll agree that the democracy Tocqueville and Jefferson prized has ceased to "endure," a word that both those great democracy-lovers often used very ominously. And the most enduring proof of that fragility fact is America's Cuban policy in three distinct periods -- 1898 to 1952, from 1952 to 1959, and from 1959 till today. So, if you really want to study the rise and fall of the American democracy, study Tocqueville, Jefferson, and, of course, America's un-democratic Cuban policy since 1898 and...particularly since 1959.
And speaking of quotations:
Cristina Escobar is no Tocqueville or Jefferson, but give her time. She's only 28 and, as indicated by this photo, she's a deep thinker, especially about democracy. She's already Cuba's absolutely brilliant television news anchor and the leader of the young-adult generation of Cubans on the island determined to make sure that they, not Miami and Washington, chart Cuba's upcoming post-Castro course. As far as quotations go, she is not yet as prolific as Tocqueville and Jefferson, but she is prolific nevertheless...as well as being patriotic and brave to the core. The most pertinent recent quotation regarding U.S.-Cuban relations hasn't come from the current fair-minded White House or from the anti-Castro zealots in Miami and in Congress, including Rubio and Cruz. It's this quotation from Cristina Escobar: "I don't want the United States to bring me democracy. That is a project for Cubans on the island, not in Miami or Washington." She has made that statement very sincerely in fluent Spanish and English, and backed it up with revolutionary fervor/rhetoric that indicates its her do-or-die belief. She is a great admirer of "Cuban patriots like Jose Marti who died on Cuban soil fighting Spanish imperialism" and she is an admirer of Fidel Castro "who fought American imperialism on Cuban soil and lived." She is not fond of "Cuban-Americans who hide behind the skirts of a superpower and hurl bricks at everyday Cubans on the island." And on her headline-making journalistic trip to Washington, she stressed that "The lies the U. S. media tells about Cuba hurts everyday Cubans the most." Her dedication to Cubans on the island has caused her to not consider extremely lucrative offers if she would defect to Miami. Next to a defection to Miami by Fidel Castro prior to his 90th birthday on August 13th, Cristina's defection would be the most cherished by the anti-revolutionary zealots in Miami and the U. S. Congress. But neither will happen. Cristina, the Cuban patriot, is reminiscent of Tocqueville, the French patriot, and Jefferson, the American patriot. "I don't want the United States to bring me democracy..." That sort of sounds like Tocqueville, Jefferson, and Marti...or even Celia Sanchez.
On April 30th, 1959 -- shortly after the triumph of the Cuban Revolution in which she was the most important player -- Celia Sanchez said: "The Batistianos will never regain control of Cuba as long as I live or as long as Fidel lives." She well knew at that time that the Batistianos had already retrenched with the full backing of the U. S. government on nearby U. S. soil. She later repeated that quotation at least twice more, once to famed Cuban journalist Carlos Franqui and then to the still-living famed journalist Marta Rojas. To this day, perhaps even more shocking than the Cuban Revolution itself, that quotation still lives because, although Celia died of cancer at age 59 in 1980, "Fidel {still} lives." In fact, her quotation may still live beyond Fidel's lifetime because...Cristina Escobar seems to be cast in the mold of Celia Sanchez. I never thought the island of Cuba could produce another Celia Sanchez. But, you know, perhaps I was wrong.
On an entirely different topic:
Spring is almost here and that means the arrival of Hummingbirds. This Birds & Blooms photo shows all eight of the portals on this feeder being used in concert by eight fascinating little hummers. Friends of Hummingbirds might see such a sight in person if they are prepared by making sugar water available. Sugar water needs this formula: One part sugar and four parts water. Authorized birders can net hummers and band them, which helps study their migratory habits. An expert, legally authorized birder I know in Virginia leaves her phone number on the banded legs for other authorized birders to check and return in place. That's how she got calls that informed her that the little green hummer that often re-visits her backyard had been to Montana as well as Canada and Ecuador during one eventful, and typical, spring.
This Birds & Blooms photo shows a green Hummingbird enjoying the sweet nectar of a red flower. Red is the magic color that, for some natural reason, attracts Hummingbirds -- red flowers or red feeders.
No comments:
Post a Comment