True Thing 20

Today Heather Cox Richardson reports that the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), a major force in the American conservative world, was directly funded by recently-ousted Hungarian President Victor Orban's government, support that was paid for by Hungarian taxpayers. 

Speaking of this support, newly-elected President Péter Magyar said,

The state will not finance these things, neither the event called CPAC nor other related institutions such as the Mathias Corvinus Collegium and similar attached bodies. I believe the state should never have financed them in the first place, it was a crime.

US Vice President J. D. Vance spoke at the Mathias Corvinus Collegium during his recent visit to Hungary to campaign for Victor Orban. 

Victor Orban, and his government, has been closely allied with Vladimir Putin's Russia for over a decade.

Today, the outgoing Hungarian Foreign Minister has been shredding classified documents.

End of True Thing 20.  Opinion:  We need to understand that the American conservative movement is allied with, and funded by, Vladimir Putin.  And, also, they are criminals.

True Things 19 - An Easter Sunday Twofer*

On Easter Sunday, two days ago, Donald Trump joined a group of about a dozen children outside the White House.**  They sat a a small white picnic table, surrounded by adults, many (most?) of them reporters, cameramen and sound techs.  Here is what Donald Trump, the sitting President of the United States, said to them on Easter Sunday:

“I could sign autographs for you guys, and then tonight, you could sell them for $25,000 on eBay.”

Trump's granddaughter Carolina was among the children at the table.  “Carolina is the only one that doesn’t want my autograph,” Trump said, as the parents laughed. “I would say Carolina has zero interest in my autograph.”  As a member of the family, does she know something we don't?

Later in the day, speaking in the White House Press Room, Trump said,

"This is one of our better Easters I think in a lot of different ways. I can say militarily, it has been one of the best."

* - Of course, he also said, also on Easter Sunday:

"Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran. There will be nothing like it!!! Open the Fuckin' Strait, you crazy bastards, or you'll be living in Hell -- JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah."

But you already knew that.

** - It's not clear why he was allowed anywhere near these kids.

A Tool

While reading about the theory of power for the previous post, I came across a way to start looking at power and how it works.  A simple set of questions for anyone who is interested in influencing the way their government distributes power.

Tony Benn, a Labour party Member of the British Parliament, asked back in 2001:

• What power have you got?
• Where did you get it from?
• In whose interests do you exercise it?
• To whom are you accountable?
• How can we get rid of you?

If we are to develop a theory of power for the post-Trump age, we need to decide which answers we want to these questions.

Consider them a tool for the work ahead of us.

Talking About the New World

While rambling around the politiverse online, I ran across an article - and a broad shift in perspective - that nudged me toward consideration of the title of this journal:  The New World II.  Initially, as you remember from the first few posts, and especially this one, my attitude toward the new world referenced by this journal's title has been "the new world - worse than the old world."  For a long time, it looked like that, probably because four years looked like forever, and damage was being done that looked permanent.

But in the last month or so, we have been seeing a lot more commentary about the new world, and the great responsibility and opportunity that we need to prepare for.  "The New World" can be discussed in terms of post-January 2027, when a Democratic House is sworn in, or post-2029, when - if - a new Democratic president is sworn in.  

It's encouraging, to say the least, to see more and more discussion about what the post-Trump world will look like.  Just seeing "post-Trump" in writing is jarring - it's been a long time since any of us has been able to see beyond the current apocalypse.

And, of course, these conversations are about A New World, and as such, I welcome them to The New World II.    

I hope there will be many more posts about The New World, as that world approaches, slowly or quickly.  Today's thoughts have been stirred up by an article in the NY Times called What Is the Left’s Theory of Power?, and it's a little chilling to realize that some of the earliest talk about the post-whatever-this-is world include discussing, and deciding on, where power comes from in America, and how it should be expressed.  We thought we had this settled 250 years ago, but the last ten years have, among other things, shown us, rather clearly, that power - where it comes from, and how it is used - is much more complex than that.  The Constitution, it turns out, actually is a collection of recommendations.  Power is crafted by the powerful.

The Times article is actually a kind of summary and analysis of a post at the Law and Political Economy Project blog, by Beau J. Baumann, but we'll stick with the summary.  Some examples of how power has been wielded:

• In the Age of Jackson it was a "racially circumscribed polity of white men, whether landowners or laborers, represented by a broad-based political party whose leader — Jackson — could act as the embodiment of their will."
• During Reconstruction, it was "an almost imperial Congress, which wrote the political and ideological settlement of the Civil War into the constitutional order."
• During the New Deal it was "a quasi-independent administrative state and a vastly empowered managerial presidency, which also sought to represent the will of the whole people."

MAGA, on the other hand, has chosen to “treat the presidency as the authentic embodiment of popular will, work systematically to sideline Congress, selectively weaken administrative capacity and subordinate the bureaucracy to executive control.”

So you have the locus of power - usually the President, less frequently the Congress (Reconstruction) - and the embodiment of the popular will - the person or group of persons which, according to the reigning theory, represent the will and the power of the people, whether they actually do or not.

Lots to unpack here, and to repack after times change.  More to come on that, maybe.  But the focus of the article is clearly expressed in it's title:  what will be the left's theory of power when, if, it returns to power after the trifecta and/or Trump himself is gone?  

What is our preferred locus of power?  How do we embody the will of the people?  Baumann, and Jamelle Bouie, who wrote the Times summary, agree that the locus should be the Congress: 

...a legislature that claims the full suite of powers and prerogatives granted to it under the Constitution.  This would be a Congress that could radically reshape the executive branch, seizing power back from the president. A Congress that could curb, curtail and discipline the Supreme Court. It could marshal public support behind a broad-based political and economic agenda and take a leading role in governing the nation.

This sounds good:  the representatives of the people, assembled, working in good faith on an agenda which serves the needs that the people have clearly outlined.  The President as the administrator who makes the agenda happen, who administrates the legislation that Congress has passed - the CEO beholden to the Board; the school Superintendent who serves at the pleasure of the Board of Education.  

Bouie lists some significant obstacles to this shift to a more representative and responsive power base - real obstacles requiring real reform and institutional change - but it seems that this kind of thing has happened before.  The last change was powered by charisma, fear and anger.  The post-Trump power shift will require intelligent planning, wide-ranging policy discussion and development, and a real connection with the voters.

Right now, this is just talk.  But  if we can do this, and be ready for what's coming, we can make a New World that's better than the one in which we currently struggle. 

Just for History's Sake

For those of you who are trying to keep score - and I don't envy you - here's how Donald Trump's personal war with Iran, using your money and your kids' lives, is going, via Digby:

Trump’s “victory timeline” claims.

Mar 3: “We won the war.”

Mar 7: “We defeated Iran.”

Mar 9: “We must attack Iran.”

Mar 9: “The war is ending almost completely, and very beautifully.”

Mar 11: “You never like to say too ⁠early you won. We won. In ​the first hour it was over.”

Mar 12: “We did win, but we haven’t won completely yet.”

Mar 13: “We won the war.”

Mar 14: “Please help us.”

Mar 15: “If you don’t help us, I will certainly remember it.”

Mar 16: “Actually, we don’t need any help at all.”

Mar 16: “I was just testing to see who’s listening to me.”

Mar 16: “If NATO doesn’t help, they will suffer something very bad.”

Mar 17: “We neither need nor want NATO’s help.”

Mar 17: “I don’t need Congressional approval to withdraw from NATO.”

Mar 18: “Our allies must cooperate in reopening the Strait of Hormuz.”

Mar 19: “US allies need to get a grip – step up and help open the Strait of Hormuz.”

Mar 20: “NATO are cowards.”

Mar 21: “The Strait of Hormuz must be protected by the countries that use it. We don’t use it, we don’t need to open it.”

Mar 22: “This is the last time. I will give Iran 48 hours. Open the strait”

Mar 22: “Iran is Dead”

Mar 23: “We had very good and productive talks with Iran.”

Mar 24: “We’re making progress.”

Mar 25: “They gave us a present and the present arrived today. And it was a very big present worth a tremendous amount of money. I’m not going to tell you what that present is, but it was a very significant prize.”

Mar 26: “Make a deal, or we’ll just keep blowing them away.”

Mar 27: “We don’t have to be there for NATO.”

Mar 28: No major quote

Mar 29: Claimed talks were progressing

Mar 30: “Open the Strait of Hormuz immediately, or face devastating consequences.”

Mar 31: Claimed a deal was “very close” and that Iran would “do the right thing”

Apr 1: “We’ll see what happens very soon.”

Apr 2: Repeated that a deal was likely, while warning of continued strikes if not

Apr 3: “Something big is going to happen.”

Apr 4: Said Iran must comply “immediately” or face further consequences.

Apr 5: “Open the fuckin’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell – JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah.”

That was as of yesterday.  Today he said,

Apr 6: ""The entire country can be taken out in one night, and that night might be tomorrow night."

Stay tuned.  Or not.  It's up to you.

Thanks for the Music

Sort of off topic.

I listen to music on community radio (mostly WOMR on the Cape) as much as possible, and usually when writing.  All the DJs are volunteer and play whatever they want to.  This morning, I am listening to "Help me Rhonda," hosted by a DJ named Rhonda who plays - you guessed it - 60s pop (plus other stuff).

Your mileage may vary, but I like this stuff.  In fact, I found myself thinking, no wonder the MAGAs want to turn back the clock.  Now in their case, they want to re-live a world where their racism and misogyny could run free, shared by everyone they knew.  That's the wrong clock.

I'd like to re-live a world full of Motown, proto-rock, early soul and R&B, popular folk, early punk.  Woodstock stuff.  1960's, early 70's.  Now playing - The Who, following Aretha Franklin.  To come, I hope, are the Stones, Bonnie Raitt, the Shirelles, Joan Baez, Jimi Hendrix, Janis, The Ramones, The Beatles, Muddy Waters, The Doors, Phil Ochs, John Mayall, Paul Butterfield, The Kinks, Tom Lehrer, Cream, Simon and Garfunkel Jackson Browne, Ry Cooder... 

Lets Make American Music Great Again!  No, actually, that doesn't work.  It's not really what I want.  It's not great just because I like it.  How about:  Let's Make It Possible For Gary To Listen To the Music He Loves All the Time.  That's all.  Community radio pretty much achieves that.  And it's music chosen by people with a passion for music, not algorithms, and I think it really makes a difference. Thanks guys!

Two other things:

All the songs I've been listening to in the last half hour have "Fool" in the title.  Now WOMR is nothing if not political (when it wants to be) and I appreciate this setlist after reading the news all morning.

Also - American music is still great, even just according to Gary's metric. Of the list above, about half are still making music, many in their 80s.  Here are Joan Baez* (85) and Bruce Springsteen (76) performing at the No Kings rally in Minneapolis last Saturday.  This is, again, art that knows what it's about.

Actually, there are a lot of more modern musicians who have studied at the feet of the greats of the past, and the musical passion and talent of the past comes through in their work.  Jesse Welles.  The Big Push.  Cake.  And loads of new bands playing blues, punk, rock and soul, who I would never have heard of if I hadn't happened on Community Radio.  So - It's Alright.

* - Thanks Abbey!