"Home"

 

 

Sydney M. Williams

 

More Essays from Essex

“Home”

October 19, 2024

 

“Maybe the best part of going away for a vacation – coming home again.”

                                                                                                     Madeleine L’Engle (1918-2007),

                                                                                                     Meet the Austins, 1960

 

A couple of weeks ago Caroline and I returned from a long weekend visit with a grandson, whom we love and are proud; but what really brought happiness was returning to our apartment on Monday. Charles Dickens is alleged to have said: “Every traveler has a home of his own, and he learns to appreciate it the more from his wandering.”

 

I have always liked being home, whether it was where I grew up, school or college, but especially the homes Caroline and I have made – from our first apartment to our six houses in four Connecticut towns, to our new home, an apartment at Essex Meadows. As we age, we are embraced by those we knew, know, loved and love, as well as by the places we have been and the people and events we have seen and experienced, all of which can be recalled through photos and mementos. Even on the bleakest of days, I gorge on memories of bygone days by observing and picking up treasures: photo albums, books, sculptures created by my parents, paintings and drawings, a few by Caroline, my parents, siblings, children and grandchildren.

 

On my desk are photos of Caroline, our children and grandchildren. There are photos of my parents and siblings, as well as ones of my grandparents. There are postcards from a brother, now deceased, who suffered from Prader-Willi Syndrome, a photo of the group with whom I skied in Vail every winter for twenty years, and a framed photo of an evening with Wodehousian Drones of New York. On the walls are drawings of my parents, paintings of our house in Old Lyme, portraits of Caroline and my mother, and a framed letter from P.G. Wodehouse to my uncle when a student at Andover. In Emma, Jane Austen wrote: “There is nothing like staying at home for real comfort.”

 

Home is awakening in a familiar bed. It is following a morning ritual – breakfast with the day’s newspapers. It is talking with Caroline about the day’s schedule, a few hours at the computer, a walk and cup of tea in the afternoon. A perfect day in eating dinner with family or friends, or while watching an old movie. In his book The Poet at the Breakfast Table, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr. includes this poem “Homesick in Heaven.”

 

“For there we loved, and where we loved is home,

Home that our feet may leave, but not our hearts,

Though o’er us shine the jasper lighted dome: –

The chain may lengthen, but it never parts!

 

In a 1938 posthumously published collection, The Coloured Lands, G.K. Chesterton wrote: “It is the main earthly business of a human being to make his home, and the immediate surroundings of his home, as symbolic to his own imagination as he can.” To which I reply, Amen!

"Choices"

 Given today’s politics, it is easy to become dispirited, at least it is for me. It is why I enjoy reading novels and history – history to remind me that much of what we experience has happened before and to put in context our experiences versus what has happened to those in the past; novels because they allow me to escape to other times, and because good novelists create characters that provide insight into people today, showing that good and evil have always been with us.

 

Attached is another essay – not to convince you of the correctness of my position – but to explain why I think and feel as I do. As an essayist, I find that I write primarily for myself.

 

Sydney M. Williams

www.swstotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Choices”

January 29, 2024

 

“It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities.”

                                                                                              Dumbledore, head of Hogwarts, speaking to Harry Potter

                                                                                              Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, 1998

                                                                                              J.K. Rowling (1965-)

 

Free choice, where it does not break the law or infringe on the rights of others, is fundamental to our rights as Americans. We make hundreds of choices every day, some significant, others not so. Next November’s election represents a significant choice. It has been portrayed as critical because, or so we are told, democracy is on the line. Progressives, and their propagandists in mainstream media, would have us believe that the election of Donald Trump would signify the end of democracy. And there is no question he is mean-spirited, has spoken of retribution against those who oppose him, and may go to jail. On the other hand, many of us on the right believe democracy is at risk because current political trends suggest we are, with the degradation of individualism, headed toward group-think, socialism, and central planning. One is reminded of Yeats: “The best lack all conviction, while the worst/ Are full of passionate intensity.”

 

As for Trump, despite his well-publicized flaws, consider what he faced in his first term: the weaponization of the intelligence services; retribution by his political enemies; along with the pursuit of identity politics, the elevation of the group over the individual, the imposition of DEI into many aspects of our lives, and the inflicting of ESG into our investment and financial organizations – the phony feel-good elements of Wokeism. Keep in mind, threats to democracy can come from the left as well as the right. So what does a thoughtful voter do? Colleen Hoover, a writer of romance stories for young teens, wrote in Hopeless: “Sometimes you have to choose between a bunch of wrong choices and no right ones.” Given what our options for President are likely to be in November, voters may face a similar ineluctable conundrum – a “Sophie’s Choice” between two bad options, the rock shoals of Scylla or the whirlpool of Charybdis. However, there are nine months to go until election day and much could happen, especially with two far-from-ideal elderly candidates.

 

In my opinion, it is too early, at least for Republicans, to raise the white flag. This may also be true for Democrats, as Biden’s polls are the lowest for a sitting President since Jimmy Carter. “Forever Trumpers” on the right and the Progressive wing of Democrats, along with their minions in the media, have already decided that Trump will be the Republican nominee and Biden the Democrat. That is what leaders of both Parties want. “Forever Trumpers” care more about the man than the Party, while Democrats see Trump as the Republican candidate easiest to beat. Republicans – the smaller of the two parties – are the Party of the individual, so managing them is like herding cats. Democrats, in contrast (and at least outwardly), remain unified behind an aged, cognitively-impaired man. As President, Mr. Biden has been marching to the beat of Obama-era Progressives – those who believe in big government, that race and gender supersede class distinctions, that racial and gender equity should repudiate merit, and that the imagery of a tossed salad better describes America than the concept of a melting pot. The latter is particularly jarring, as it promotes segregation rather than assimilation.

 

Is it not possible that the wishes of a majority of Americans – Independents along with moderate Republicans and Democrats – are being ignored by Party leaders and mainstream media? 

 

To win the Democratic nomination, the winner must have the votes of 1,969 delegates. While Biden won New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary via write-ins (against the wealthy Minnesota businessman, Representative Dean Phillips), his name was not on the ballot, so, at this point, Biden has no delegates. To win the Republican nomination, the winner must have the support of 1,215 delegates. As of now Trump has 32 and Nikki Haley has 17. While Trump, like Biden, appears to have the advantage, the race for Party nominee is not over. Most polls show Haley as the more formidable candidate against Biden. As for Biden’s competition at this point, Dean Phillips will likely not warrant a footnote in a history of 21^st Century American politics. Third party candidates could cause a change: No Labels may in fact nominate someone, and the impact of Robert Kennedy, Jr’s. run for the White House is unknown. Nevertheless, with two aging white men just out of the gate and hobbling down the track, the race is yet to be run.

 

According to Ballotpedia and as of 2022, Democrats comprise 38.8% of registered voters, Republicans 29.4%, and Independents 28.6%. While extremists now appear to control both Parties, to win a victor must appeal to Independents and to moderates in both Parties, which is why, in my opinion, Nikki Haley would be the better (and more redoubtable) Republican candidate. And it is the reason why mainstream media has been so quick to argue the helplessness of her quest and the inevitability of both Trump and Biden.

 

But even if Biden and Trump are on the ballot in November, the choice then confronting us would be more than personality differences between two aged, flawed men. Who would be their running mates? More important is what the election of either man would mean in terms of the future of the country. Progressive Democrats – the Obama branch of the Party – advocate statism with a larger role for government. Last week in New Hampshire Representative Dean Phillips (D-MN), promised to provide thousand-dollar American Dream Accounts for every baby born in the country, offer free college tuition for all, and guarantee a $15.00 per hour minimum wage.  Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA), who leads the polls to become his state’s next Senator has promised to abolish the Senate filibuster rule, increase the number of justices on the Supreme Court to thirteen from nine, cancel at least $50,000 in student loan debt for every borrower, increase the corporate tax rate from today’s 21% to 35%, legalize the harvesting of votes, and institute a pilot program for a “Universal Basic Income.” And these Democrats claim to be preserving democracy!

 

We live in the greatest democracy the world has ever known. It is not perfect, but it has evolved over time into a fairer system and will continue to evolve. There is no end of history. We face threats from China and Russia, as well as rogue states, and challenges unknown to those who came before us: artificial intelligence and cyber warfare. Thus it is most important not to lose focus on the principles upon which our nation was founded, those embedded in our Constitution and Declaration of Independence, in the “Golden Rule,” and in the moral and ethical lessons from our Judeo-Christian heritage. The voting booth is where we exercise our choice as to who will represent us in government. We do not seek the perfect candidate, but rather the one who best represents our opinions and beliefs. Voting is a privilege, an honor, and a duty. So think carefully; don’t be influenced by slogans, bullied by advocates, or hustled to decide betimes.

 

As Dumbledore said to Harry Potter, the choices we make define who we are. “We are our choices” is a line often ascribed to Existentialist philosopher and novelist Jean-Paul Sartre. And we are all familiar with Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol when Ebenezer Scrooge is confronted with the ghost of his late partner Jacob Marley. “‘You are fettered,’ said Scrooge. ‘Tell me why.’ ‘I wear the chains I forged in life,’ replied the Ghost. ‘I made it link by link, and yard by yard; I girded it on of my own free will, and of my own free will I wore it.’” Come November and no matter whom you vote for, the consequences will not be as dire as they were for Jacob Marley. But in a country that has survived and thrived for almost 250 years voting should be taken seriously. Make sure you exercise the privilege. The choice is yours. The future belongs to our children and grandchildren.

"Time"

 With so much going on – debt negotiations, a Presidential race on the gathering horizon, war in Ukraine, failing schools, and corporations and universities that have lost their moral compass – it may seem trivial to write an essay that lacks gravitas, but we all need a break, so this seemed timely.

 

Sydney M. Williams

30 Bokum Road – Apartment 314

Essex, CT 06426

 

More Essays from Essex

“Time”

May 23, 2023

 

“How did it get so late so soon? It’s night before it’s afternoon. December is here

before it’s June. My goodness, how the time has flewn. How did it get so late so soon?”

                                                                                                         Attributed to Dr. Seuss (Ted Geisel, 1904-1991)

 

Time is both precise and ambiguous. Computer scientists measure it in zeptoseconds, the time it takes a particle of light to cross a hydrogen molecule, which has an ionic radius (don’t ask) of 0.208 nanometers, one billionth of a meter. The longest measurement of time is a supereon, three billion years. For us, time is finite. In my 83^rd year, I have lived just under 730,000 hours, barely a nanosecond for a paleontologist.

 

Stopwatches are used to measure the time it takes a runner, skier, race car, or horse to cross the finish line. But the word can be vague: ‘She won’t give me the time of day,’ ‘Will the doctor have time to see me?’ ‘My love for Caroline, my children and grandchildren is timeless.’ “And indeed there will be time,” wrote T.S. Eliot in The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock, “to wonder, ‘Do I dare?’ and Do I dare?’” A Tale of Two Cities begins: “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times…” While ambiguous, we know what Dickens meant. And then there is this quote from Tolkien’s The Fellowship of the Ring, which reflects his time in the trenches during the Great War: “‘I wish it need not have happened in my time,’ said Frodo. ‘So do I,’ said Gandalf, ‘and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.’” 

 

While every hour has sixty minutes and each minute sixty seconds, hours and minutes spent in childhood seemed longer than those spent in adulthood, probably because each hour of childhood was a larger percent of our lives. And time continues to accelerate as we age. Nevertheless, we have more time than did our great grandparents. In 1860, life expectancy in the U.S. was 39.4 years. By 2020 it had doubled to 78.9 years. Will it double again for our great grandchildren? And time varies by species. An hour represents about 4% in the life of a Mayfly, while for Jonathan, a 190-year-old Seychelle giant tortoise, an hour represents only 1/1,664,400th% of his life. It is possible that future scientists might learn from the immortal Turritopsis dohrnii jellyfish, which, once it reproduces, reverts to a polyp stage and starts life all over again.

 

But we are not jellyfish. As we get older, old photographs capture the past – Caroline in her wedding gown, a child’s school play and another’s college graduation, our daughter’s wedding, and our grandchildren growing up – images of moments in time, moments savored that molded us into the people we have become. Abraham Lincoln is alleged to have once said, “The best thing about the future is that it comes one day at a time.” Timely words from a wise man.

 

So, relax, take it easy, don’t worry. You have time. But, for me, now is the time to end this essay.

"Roald Dahl - Thoughts on Fiction and History"

 Winter came late to Connecticut. While we had a few cold days in December and January, this year’s weather, at least here where we live, has been mild and, more surprisingly, snow-less. That changed as this monstrous storm moved across the country, dumping snow and wreaking havoc. And, finally, as February was saying adieu, it brought us some snow – not much, perhaps three inches, but enough to make the trees sparkle and to remind us of the beauty winter came bring.

 

Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Roald Dahl – Thoughts on Fiction and History”

March 1, 2023

 

“Without memory, there is no culture. Without memory,

there would be no civilization, no society, no future.”

                                                                                                                Elie Wiesel (1928-2016)

                                                                                                                NPR – “All Things Considered”

                                                                                                                April 7, 2008

 

Novels are vessels that carry our past. If we abandon or amend them, we relinquish or alter our past. Oliver Twist, published in 1838, provides a look at first-half-19^th Century London, an unpleasant place to be poor. Tolstoy’s War and Peace, written in 1869 provides a Russian perspective on the Napoleonic Wars, which were devastating for both victor and vanquished.  Joel Chandler Harris, born and raised in Georgia, wrote Uncle Remus in 1881, during Reconstruction and the early Jim Crow era, a time when blacks in America were treated badly. These books make some uncomfortable, but they are social commentaries on their time. Fiction speaks to thoughts people had, words they spoke, and actions they took. Through them we can trace the arc of civilization as it has advanced over the centuries.

 

Last week Penguin Random House made the sensible decision to rescind their earlier announcement that only expurgated versions of Roald Dahl’s books for children would be published by Penguin Young Readers Group in the U.S. and Puffin Books in the UK. Now, copies with the original language will be branded as The Roald Dahl Classic Collection, to differentiate them from edited copies for more sensitive readers. However, it is troubling that the change came only after a backlash that included such writers as Salmon Rushdie (a man who knows what it is to be censored) and Camilla, United Kingdom’s Queen Consort, who urged writers to “remain true to your calling, unimpeded by those who may wish to curb the freedom of your expression or impose limits on your imagination.” Wise words from a well-read woman. Consumers are best served when offered a choice, which is what Penguin is now doing.

 

Changing words in books is not the same as censorship, but it is illustrative of a different problem – the coddling of American youth. Young children were once taught to prepare for a tough world. The old adage: “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me” has been updated to conform with today’s more sensitive culture: “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can also harm me. /Stones and sticks break only skin, while words are ghosts that haunt me.” It is not that parents of my generation (and earlier) were unaware of bullying and taunting or did not love their children. They were and they did. They also wanted them to be responsible, accountable, and respective of others. We also knew the world is a tough place, and we knew that children should be prepared.

 

Both the left and the right have been guilty of banning and/or challenging books that do not conform to their ideologies. A photograph of California’s Gavin Newsome was published in the April 7, 2022 issue of Newsweek. He was “reading some banned books.” In his hands was a copy of Toni Morrison’s Beloved (banned by the right). On the table was a copy of Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird (banned by the left). On the right, books on LBGTQ subjects have been challenged or banned in some elementary schools, books like George by Alex Gino, Stamped: Racism, Anti-racism, and You by Ibram X and Jason Reynolds, and All American Boys by Jason Reynolds and Brendan Kiely. Some parents feel the books’ content age-inappropriate for their young children, and their wishes should be respected. The left has placed challenges or imposed bans on books they see as insensitive to gender and racial issues, like George Orwell’s 1984, Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Finn, and Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck. 

 

It took a while, and their initial, instinctive reaction was wrong, but Penguin Random House made the right decision in offering readers a choice. Roald Dahl was known as an antisemite and misogynist, but his books have sold over 300 million copies since the early 1940s. His books, and movies made from them, have entertained and enlivened the lives of millions of children in dozens of countries. Penguin’s decision ensures that millions more will have the delight of knowing Willy Wonka, Augustus Gloop, Matilda Wormwood, and many others. 

 

None of this is to argue that fiction is always accurate in its portrayal of the past. It is, after all, fiction, meant to tell a story, to make a point. And historical figures, like public ones today, are generally more nuanced than shown. Nevertheless, we get a sense of life in mid 19^th Century English debtors’ prison by reading of Charles Dickens’ Amy Dorrit and of what it was like to grow up black in 1930s Alabama by getting to know Harper Lee’s character, Tom Robinson.

 

Changing words in any book leads to a slippery slope, more associated with totalitarian regimes than with a nation of free people. Let us pray that the media coverage of the Dahl episode will cause both sides to reconsider their efforts to ban or challenge books that do not suit their particular political ideology. As Elie Wiesel said in his talk on NPR fifteen years ago, in speaking of the horrors he suffered during the Holocaust: “…our stories are essential – essential to memory.” Most writers today were not alive then, but knowledgeable and empathetic writers of fiction can provide readers a sense of time and place, of what caused the tragic events in Germany. Such stories may prevent future nightmares. Not all that is written is true, but truth only emerges when authors are free from censors, when books are not altered, challenged, or banned, and when readers are free to decide for themselves what to read.

"Why Have Politics Become So Hateful?"

 To replace the retiring Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, Stephen Breyer, President Biden promised an “historic appointment,” a black woman. Consider how much more powerful his words would have been (and more important to the appointee) if he had promised to nominate the most qualified individual, and then named a black woman.

 

Last Thursday was Holocaust Remembrance Day, something we should all honor in a world with rising anti-Semitism. I recall my father telling me, about a decade after he had returned from combatting the Germans in Italy’s Apennines, to never forget what the Nazis did, in attempting to eliminate the Jewish people.

 

Here in Connecticut, we are getting a full winter blast – low temperatures, a blizzard and high winds. It is beautiful to look at, as long as one can remain indoors.

 

Sydney M. Williams

 

Thought of the Day

“Why Have Politics Become So Hateful?”

January 29, 2022

 

“Don’t let anger control you.

Don’t let hate enslave you.

Don’t let negativity overcome you.

Don’t let bitterness conquer you.”

                                                                                                Attributed to Matshona Dhliwayo (1982 -)

                                                                                                Zimbabwean-born Canadian author

 

In a September 2021 Public Agenda/USA Today/Ipsos poll, 72% of Americans thought it would be “good for the country” if there were less political hostility and a greater focus on common ground. Yet only 9% of respondents thought hostilities would decrease in the next decade, while 42% expected them to increase. Why have political differences made us so bitter? Why do we hate those with different opinions so intensely? What does this anger mean for the future of our nation?

 

Political hatred has had a long gestation.  It is easy to blame the crude and narcissistic Donald Trump. But this bitterness preceded him. He made things worse, but he was not its genesis. He reflected the animosity felt by rural and mid-Americans toward coastal elites. He widened and deepened the divide, but he was not its cause. Barack Obama, as the first African American elected President, was one who could have bridged racial dissensions. Instead, he made things worse. It is true that Mr. Obama was despised by a few right-wing racists, but most criticisms of his policies were assumed by his supporters to be race-based. President Joe Biden ran on a platform of unity, yet he has fanned the flames of partisanship; an example – when in Georgia he referred to Republicans as similar to Jefferson Davis, George Wallace and Bull Connor, ironically all Democrats. Political hatefulness has deepened because of social media and cable TV.

I do not presume to know all reasons why we have become so angry. But I suspect three culprits play a role: wokeism, identity politics, and a breakdown of traditional ethical norms. Wokeism is a creed that uses Jacobin tactics to foster economic chaos and property destruction, as it obsesses about climate, race, class and gender. Climate evangelists call opponents deniers – those who suggest adaption and see natural forces as an important cause of climate change. Then we have transgender women allowed to compete in women’s college sports. Wokeism in the classroom and the boardroom has replaced meritocracy with equity, in the belief it will produce equality of outcomes. In their unbridled zeal, these acolytes of wokeism, with their self-righteousness and absence of common sense, remind one of Dickens’ Mrs. Jellyby. 

 

As for identity politics, for years politicians compartmentalized the electorate into addressable groups. Old people care about health and security. Young parents care about schools. Farmers care about vicissitudes of the weather. Coal miners care about loss of jobs, while environmentalists worry about climate change. Immigrants (legal ones) care about citizenship, while Americans who live along borders care about illegal crossings. The wealthy care about tax rates, while the needy care about assistance. Now, promotion of gender and racial politics have aggravated differences. Affirmative action was used to address years of discrimination, and which, while necessary fifty years ago, has had the consequence of again, segregating people by race. Once divided, these groups became difficult to stitch back together.

 

Perhaps it is unsurprising that in a multicultural country, traditional ethical behavior is seen as “too white,” too reflective of western values. Yet it has been those values, along with rule of law, protection of private property and guarantees of free expression, that attracted immigrants to this country. But is the U.S. still that country? Civics and civil behavior are no longer taught. Church attendance has been in decline. since the early 1960s. Family formations have been in decline for forty years. The average age of Americans in 1960 was 29.5. In 2000, it was 35.3 and today it is 38.3. To help fill diminishing state treasury coffers, states like “blue” Connecticut promote gaming, the lottery, and on-line and sports betting, while dismissing the attendant increase in gambling addiction and the regressive nature of such funding. People become disillusioned when sold false promises of riches. An aging and shrinking population hampers economic growth, which leads to impatience that gives birth to stress. 

 

Barring a war or national emergency, unity is difficult in any country. But it is especially so in a multi-racial nation of assorted ethnicities. The government’s handling of COVID created dissension. One would have thought that a Chinese-originated infectious disease – whether from a wet market or a lab – would have unified the U.S. (and the world) against China. Instead, the disease was politicized. Inter-governmental agencies with financial ties to China have impeded investigations as to the pandemic’s origins. “Follow the science” became the mantra, even as the science was changing. Special powers were granted governors. “You are with us or against us” are the words of a tyrant. There was no middle way, no room for debate.

 

One thing that could help restore a sense of unity would be a political leader with the self-deprecating humor of a Lincoln, Coolidge or Reagan. Lincoln, when accused of being two-faced: “If I had another face, do you think I would wear this one?” Coolidge, when asked what it felt like to be President: “Well, you got to be mighty careful.” Reagan, when in debate with Mondale and the subject of age arose: “I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent’s youth and inexperience.” None of these quips were nasty or injurious. Non-aggressive humor, unlike today’s political cartoons and late-night TV, has a bonding effect. Such humor is missing in today’s partisan swamp.

 

Differences are important in a democracy and debate is critical to understanding. But so is civility. We will never (nor should we) agree on everything. Compromise is not a four-letter word. There is unnecessary nastiness in Democrats claiming that a Republican win in the midterms will put democracy at risk, as Nancy Pelosi declared in her re-election announcement. Keep in mind, it was the Democratic Party that issued mandates, canceled speakers, censored speech, enforced segregation – now against Asians and whites – and jailed without habeas corpus many of those who invaded the Capitol last January 6.  This is not a call for blind patriotic devotion, but neither is it to agree with Samuel Johnson declaration: “Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.” It is to acknowledge that just as evil exists, so does goodness, in people and in nations. It is to argue that the United States, despite obvious historical and current warts, has been a force for good in this world, more so than any other nation – deserving of pride. And it has been so because it has always put first the freedom of the individual, while combining, as the late conservative political philosopher Roger Scruton noted, a suspicion of government with the acknowledgement of its necessity.

 

Without a reduction in political animosity, how will the U.S. address the real problems we confront: China’s and Russia’s aggression; nuclear weapons in rogue states; the failure of our K-12 public schools? Balancing the budget. Problems at home and in the world are real. Hatefulness will not solve them.

The Month That Was - December 2018

Sydney M. Williams

swtotd.blogspot.com

The Month That Was – December 2018

January 1, 2019

“The rapid nightfall of mid-December had quite beset the little village,

as they approached it on soft feet over a first thin fall of powdery snow.”

                                                                                                            Kenneth Grahame (1859-1932)

                                                                                                            Wind in the Willows, 1908

January is not only a time we look back, but, like Janus, it is a time we try to penetrate an impenetrable future. In doing so, we must remember that predictions, no matter how analytical and allegedly impartial, are influenced by ideologies and biases. However, I suspect we all agree that the 2020 Presidential race began as soon as the ball dropped in Times Square. The Democrat field will be crowded. Youth and idealism will challenge age and experience. Far-Left socialists will combat centrists. On the Right, the big questions:Will Republicans try to unseat President Trump?Or will Mr. Trump decide one term was enough, declare victory and retire?After all, he will turn 74 in 2020, and the Presidency is not where most people would choose to spend their “golden” years. Of course, he is not “most people.”

………………………………………………………….

Back to December. It was a month of contrasts, like the opening sentence in A Tale of Two Cities, “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times…it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair…” The economy was the strongest in a dozen years, yet stocks fell. Equities saw their biggest Christmas Eve sell-off in history. On the next trading day, they had their largest point gain ever. Questions arose: Should President Trump be true to his campaign promises, or should he compromise? He is condemned for not doing so; he is condemned when he does so. Is nationalism a force for evil, as Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron claim? Or is nationhood necessary for liberty, as most conservatives believe? Are those who voted for Brexit and Donald Trump, and who have rallied against the state and the corrupt policies of elites in business, finance and government ignorant, or are they battling elitism, statism and the status quo? Are people better off when the focus is on identity – intersectionality – rather than the individual? Will millennials bend toward capitalism, or will they lean toward socialism? Did Michael Flynn lie, or was he entrapped? Has an increase in carbon dioxide allowed the earth to become greener and more productive, as a NASA survey last month alleged, or will it be the death of the planet, as Kyoto and Paris assert? Has there ever been a U.S. President more critically scrutinized and more vilified by MSM than Donald J. Trump?  

Hypocrisy among politicians is an unfortunate fact, as is affectation in the media. We saw it in the multi-day George H.W. Bush memorial and burial, which was an over-the-top extravaganza, even for a decent and accomplished man – Air Force One from and to Houston, a memorial service at the National Cathedral and another the next day at St. Martin’s Episcopal Church and then a slow train ride to the burial site in College Station. It was a send-off usually reserved for kings and potentates. But it felt like those who had long condemned the man and his politics were trying to atone for what they had done, or were they using his death to contrast the polished, gracious Mr. Bush with the brash, artless Mr. Trump?

There was always a sense that Mr. Bush’s WASPish background was decent and ethical. His love for his family was appreciated, especially by those who believe in strong family values. But there was something surreal, in fact disquieting, in the adulation by the media for a dead white man they had ridiculed while alive. We expect dissimulation in our politicians but, in vain, look for objectivity from the press. Mr. Bush came to the oval office at a pivotal time, but the great events then occurring were a result of two previous politicians – Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher – who oversaw the blood-less overthrow of the Soviet Union, which ended the Cold War and allowed Eastern Europe to ally with the West. Operation Desert Storm chased Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi army out of Kuwait but didn’t stop him from killing 50,000 to 100,000 Iraqi Kurds in the north and Shiites in the south. The failure to destroy him, along with 9/11, were prologue to the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the never-ending Second Gulf War.

…………………………………………………….

While disagreements over control of illegal immigrants led to a partial government shutdown at the end of the month, the impact is felt more in the media than in most people’s lives. Immigration is solvable, but both sides prefer to keep the issue alive. Semantics is part of the problem. A “wall” denotes keeping people in as well as out. Even President Trump has suggested using another word, if that helps effect a more secure border. He asked the Senate to end cloture, so that a simple majority vote could be taken – a decision that, in my opinion, would be a mistake, as filibusters help protect the rights of minority parties. Such a change would haunt Republicans, as Democrats discovered in 2018 after Harry Reid’s decision to use the nuclear option for judicial appointments in 2013. A government shut-down became inevitable when Mr. Trump, on TV and in front of Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi, said he would take responsibility, an offer so good negotiations never began. Mr. Trump stayed in Washington, while Ms. Pelosi vacationed in Hawaii.

Changes in Administrative personnel amounted to “chaos,” according to a mainstream media. Whether true or not, change can be disruptive. Heather Nauert, State Department spokeswoman and former Fox News correspondent, will replace Nikki Haley as Ambassador to the U.N. William Barr, Attorney General under George H.W. Bush, will replace Jeff Sessions. Chief of Staff John Kelly will be replaced by Michael Mulvaney, currently Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Defense Secretary James Mattis will leave on January 1, to be replaced, temporarily, by Deputy Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan. In a controversial decision, Mr. Trump chose to withdraw 2000 U.S. troops based in Syria and to begin bringing home half the troops stationed in Afghanistan. He explained: “We have defeated ISIS in Syria, my only reason for being there…” On a surprise Christmas visit to troops in Iraq, President Trump reiterated, to a standing ovation, his position on Syria.

………………………………………………………

Overseas, the month began with a meeting of the Group of 20 in Buenos Aires.  The choreography was fascinating, as presidents and prime ministers pirouetted away from being photographed with the despised Saudi Prince Mohammad bin Salman. The exception was Vladimir Putin who high-fived the man as he sat down, sending a message that he approves of killing and dismembering dissidents. The Intergovernmental Conference on the Global Compact for Migration met in Marrakech to approve a previously adopted UN resolution for safe, orderly and regular migration. Its purpose, “to cover all dimensions of international migration in a holistic and comprehensive manner.” That sounds good, but, when one sees what those policies have done to our southern border and what has happened (and is happening) in Europe, should we be surprised when so many question the wisdom of the “established liberal order”? Another boondoggle, for which we in the U.S. pay the largest share, was the climate meeting in Katowice, Poland, where signatories to the 2015 Paris Accord agreed to implement rules laid out three years earlier. One consequence was a protest in France. Too often, bureaucrats fail to include economic costs of feel-good policies. Russia successfully flight-tested their Avangard Hypersonic Glide Vehicle, an ICBM that travels at twenty times the speed of sound. The system, as Putin explained “is impervious to current and future air defense and missile defense systems of a potential enemy.” The missile, first announced last spring and its launch last month, is a violation of the INF Treaty, and explains why President Trump withdrew from that treaty in October. In another blow to globalism, Japan exited the International Whaling Commission.

Theresa May survived a no-confidence vote, 200 to 117. Those voting against her were hoping for a strong Leave-supporting leader to emerge. The risk, as they saw it, is that the U.K. becomes a vassal state, locked into the EU without a voice. Elitist European leaders in Brussels, already distanced from the people they represent, are shortsighted in making themselves unpopular with middleclass Europeans who have a sense of patriotism toward their heritage and native countries. If Parliament does not approve the deal Mrs. May negotiated a “hard” Brexit may ensue, or possibly an abandonment of Brexit, meaning the will of the people has been abrogated. Those who voted for Brexit in 2016 wanted to take back their sovereignty and their courts, not have them tied to unelected Continental bureaucrats in Brussels and Strasbourg. This battle for Britain – a restoration of middleclass values and incomes – is one being played out in other nations, including the United States. It is a fight between those who believe in the rights of the individual versus the might of tribalism. It raises the possibility of an all-powerful state and the bureaucracy it supports. Unlike past democratic disagreements, this is a fight over ends, not means. Emmanuel Macron, the sanctimonious President of France, finally bowed to the gilets jaunes: He granted an increase in the monthly wage of a 100 Euros per month, with a promise that overtime pay would be exempt from tax and social charges, and that the planned tax on pensions under 2,000 Euros a month would be cancelled. He also said that the fuel tax surcharge would be suspended. But he refused to reinstate a higher tax on the wealthy.

Churchill’s definition of Russia, as “a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma,” applies to the Middle East. Two Muslim countries, Iran and Saudi Arabia, are locked in a battle for supremacy – Shia versus Sunni, with Yemen and Syria as battlefields. A temporary ceasefire was negotiated in Yemen. Turkey and Iran are aligned against the Kurds and, thereby, against the U.S. Both see Syria as opportunity. The murder of Jamal Khashoggi disrupted our alliance with Saudi Arabia and may have allied us more closely with Erdogan’s Turkey, a country deemed “not free” by Freedom House. No matter, the U.S. remains committed to the region. Withdrawing troops from Syria and some from Afghanistan does not mean the U.S. is abandoning the Middle East militarily. The United States has over 50,000 troops stationed in a dozen Middle East countries. World-wide, the U.S. has 165,000 soldiers deployed in 150 countries. 

……………………………………………………

As for markets and the economy, “the future,” as the song goes, “is not ours to see.” I have long taken a perverse view of markets. When they rise, I know that at some point they will fall; and when they decline, I know that they will, at some future time, go higher. But I also know the long-term trend is upward. So, I don’t worry as much as others. It is dividend growth that concerns this aged ex-stock broker, not the timing of markets, something impossible to predict. Will a recession occur in the next couple of years? I don’t know. I do know Democrats are hoping so, and I also know we are not immune from one. We have lived through nine and a half years of economic growth, in which manufactured low rates played a role, and now, finally, they are beginning to normalize. On the positive side, the middle class is catching up. Wages and salaries were up 3.1%, the fastest growth in a decade, and Christmas sales were the strongest ever. Low interest rates have helped equities, which have risen three-fold in ten years, but low rates have done little for oil, gold, Bitcoins and home prices. Nevertheless, I am not overly concerned. In my opinion, we have seen nothing, thus far, that would compare to the high inflation rates and despondency of the 1970s, to the late 1990s tech bubble or to the credit crisis of 2008.  But equity and oil markets swooned in December. Both were lower by 10% for the month, with crude down 25% for the year and the DJIA down 7%. In terms of daily volatility, the month of December was the most volatile since November 2011. The VIX rose for the year and the month, peaking on Christmas Eve. Bond yields rose for the year, though they fell in December. The reverse was true for gold. The Dollar rose for the year but fell in December.

What should concern people over the long term is not a possible trade war with China, higher interest rates, climate change or stock market performance. The existential threat we face is demographics – a dearth of births and an aging population. In 1957, 4.3 million babies were born in the U.S., then with a population of 172 million. According to a report issued last month by Lyman Stone of the American Enterprise Institute for Family Studies, there were 3.9 million births in 2017. In 1957, the median age in the U.S. was 29; today it is 38. Life expectancy in 1957 was 69.5; today it is 78.8. In 1957, the population of the U.S. grew 1.7%. Last year it grew at 0.6 percent. Between 1957 and 2017 real GDP growth compounded at an annual growth rate of 3.05%. Over the past ten years, it has compounded at less than two percent. Even with immigration numbers included, nine states saw population declines in 2017, including New York, Illinois and my state of Connecticut. Those numbers are concerning. Who will pay for our aging population? Longevity is increasing and the workforce is shrinking. Can a country continue to grow once its population begins to decline? Is immigration the answer or should government encourage more births This is a world-wide problem. The situation in Europe, Russia, Japan and even China is direr than in the U.S.

…………………………………………………

In other news domestically, a Marriott data breach left 500 million people exposed. Mr. Trump’s former attorney, Michael Cohen was sentenced to three years in jail for financial crimes and lying to Congress. In a single session before the House Judiciary Committee, former FBI Director and current Trump critic James Comey, replied 245 times: “I do not know,” or “I do not recall.” Scott Walker of Wisconsin signed three bills before leaving office: To give the legislature power to block administrative rules, including the banning of guns; to codify voter ID and Medicare work requirements, and to restrict early voting to two weeks. In Arizona, Martha McSally, who lost a close race for the Senate to Krysten Sinema, was appointed to the Senate to fill out the remainder of John McCain’s term. Elizabeth Warren announced the formation of an exploratory committee, making her a likely candidate for President in 2020. After a twenty-three-year run, the Weekly Standardclosed. Its circulation had shrunk by double digits in every year except one, since 2013. Fred Barnes, executive editor and co-founder, noted that the magazine’s “criticism of Trump affects circulation negatively.” But its problems predated the 2016 election. Two Guatemalan children – ages seven and eight – died of illness while in U.S. custody, after crossing the border illegally. Following a two-year trip, the robotic explorer Osiris-Rex came within twelve miles of the asteroid Bennu, where it will remain in orbit for a year. And Congress can’t solve immigration? Colin O’Brady became the first person to complete a solo crossing of the Antarctic. 16-year-old Kansan Braxton Moral will receive two degrees in May – his high school diploma and a bachelor’s degree from Harvard. 

Political correctness made its way across the country. The Harvard Medical School released a statement in which they condemned the decision by the Health and Human Services Department to explicitly define sex “on a biological basis that is clear, grounded in science, objective and administrable.” They responded: “Harvard Medical School is staunchly opposed to any efforts by federal agencies to limit the definition of sex as an immutable condition determined at birth.” That was an odd retort from a science-based institution. For decades, the Frank Loesser-penned song, “Baby, it’s Cold Outside,” which won an Academy Award for best original song in 1949, was a staple of the Christmas season. No longer. Several radio stations banned it, claiming it is a “prelude to rape.” Speaking of Christmas, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the 29-year-old newly-elected Representative from New York’s 14^thDistrict, told us that Joseph and Mary, with Mary pregnant with the baby Jesus, did not travel from Nazareth to Bethlehem to comply with orders from Roman census-takers. No, they were refugees, like Guatemalans scrambling to reach the U.S. border.

Falling into the political correctness trap is easy. In an interview with the New York Times, James Dyson, British inventor and industrial designer, referred to Asia as the “Far East,” an error for which the Times felt obligated to issue an apology. A black teenage wrestler, Andrew Johnson, was forced to cut his dreadlocks by a white referee, or risk forfeiting his match. The incident became a media sensation, and the referee became persona non grata. But in August 1962, at Fort Dix, a young white male Army recruit (me) was forced by a black first sergeant to have his hair cut. That event went unrecorded and unremarked. There are differences, certainly, but one wonders: Is there a bigger message regarding attitudes of respect toward authority figures? The politically correct Jeff Bezos said Amazon wants to cut the CRaP (Can’t Realize any Profit). As a member of the Leftist establishment, mainstream media left him alone, despite the impact on manufacturers of low-priced consumer goods. Clemson Professor Todd May wrote a piece for NYTimes.com: “Would Human Extinction Be a Tragedy?” In his answer, he was ambivalent – there would be suffering “among those who have much to lose by dying…but the prevention of future humans from existing would cause no suffering.” And for this analysis one pays $48,500 a year!

…………………………………………………

In other news internationally, a Christmas market in Strasbourg was the scene of a gunman yelling “Allahu Akbar.” Cherif Chekatt killed five and wounded eleven. Chekatt, a self-styled Jihadist, was known to the police who obviously weren’t paying attention. During the month, the Democratic Republic of Congo twice put off the presidential election, an election already delayed by two years. However, the vote did get underway on Sunday, December 30. The most recent excuses were an Ebola outbreak and a fire on Christmas day that destroyed voting materials for nineteen of Kinshasa’s (the capital) twenty-four constituencies. President Joseph Kabila has been in office almost eighteen years. He doesn’t appear anxious to leave. (But the West forgets how slowly democracy evolved in Western Europe and even in the United States. While the U.S. achieved independence through revolution, democracy has been an evolutionary process). Europe’s liberal order, which emerged from the ashes of World War II, is at risk of self-immolation: For example, the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation, a regulation that claims to protect the privacy of consumers within the EU, deemed the sending of corporate Christmas cards a violation. 

Iran, a preferred trading partner of Germany and France, launched a ballistic missile capable of delivering nuclear weapons to southern Europe. Denmark announced that anyone who takes Danish citizenship be required to shake hands at the naturalization ceremony. The policy is aimed at Muslims who refuse on religious grounds to touch members of the opposite sex. For the Miss Universe contest, Spain nominated a transgender, providing viewers a full-frontal view of political correctness. Australia announced that it recognizes West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and will move their Tel Aviv embassy once a peace settlement is announced. The eruption of volcanic island Anak Krakatau in Indonesia caused a tsunami that killed 430 and injured 1500. A roadside bomb, hit by a tourist bus near the pyramids of Giza, killed four and wounded ten. In retaliation, Egyptian police killed forty alleged terrorists who, police said, were planning a series of attacks. Dutch TV personality, Emile Ratelbard, who last month filed suit to get his age lowered from 69 to 49, lost his case in court.

………………………………………………

Death claimed Penny Alexander at 75, the Laverne of “Laverne and Shirley” and director of “Big,” the first film directed by a woman to gross over $100 million. Bob Bryan, one half of the comedy duo “Bert and I,” died at 87. Richard Overton, America’s oldest World War II veteran, died at 112 in Austin, Texas. Scott Coby, with whom I worked forty-five years ago, died at 75. And my brother George’s Westphalian mare Rocher, the U.S. Equestrian Federation’s horse of the year in 2003, died at 27.

…………………………………………………

With the next election less than two years out, political rhetoric will ratchet higher. While there were periods when politics were less contentious, roots of polarization run deep. In 1869, Anthony Trollope published Phineas Finn, the second in his Palliser series. He wrote about the fraternity of Parliamentarians when off the floor:“It is not so in the United States. There the same political enmity exists, but there, political enmity produces private hatred. The leaders of parties there really mean what they say when they abuse each other.” His words, written in the aftermath of the Civil War, suggest what we experience today is something our Country has seen before. The French have an expression:“Plus ca change, plus c’est la même chose.” We live, as the Chinese saying goes, in interesting times. 2019 will be filled with surprises. What will they be?I have no idea, but the spectacle should be fun, as long as our Republic does not suffer irreparable damage.

……………………………………………….

With those as final words for 2018, I wish you a happy, healthy and more civilized 2019! 

"Stuck in a Reading Rut"

Sydney M. Williams

Essay from Essex

“Stuck in a Reading Rut?”

March 3, 2018

“The more that you read, the more places you will know.

The more that you learn, the more places you will go.”

                                                                        Dr. Seuss (Theodore Geisel, 1904-1991)

                                                                        “I Can Read With My Eyes Shut!”

As in most things, we tend to stick to what’s familiar in books we read. If one likes mysteries, and one just finished a juicy murder by Agatha Christie, Josephine Tey or Patricia Cornwall one will turn to Marilyn Stasio of the New York Times to find out what she’s recommending, or Otto Penzler, of the Mysterious Book Shop in Manhattan.

But does it not make sense to try something different? Recently, Erin Geiger Smith of the Wall Street Journal wrote an article with the title I borrowed for this piece. Her column made me think of a change I had made. I have long alternated between fiction and non-fiction. I read non-fiction to learn – history, people, events – books like Ron Chernow’s Alexander Hamilton, David Brooks’ On Paradise Drive, Jennet Conant’s Tuxedo Park and Niall Ferguson’s The Ascent of Money.  Fiction, in contrast, I used to read only for pleasure – like watching a light movie after a docudrama. I read anything by Wodehouse and everything by my daughter-in-law Beatriz Williams. I read Robert Barnard, John Marquand, and Old Lyme’s David Handler. Generally, I read about thirty books a year – not much when one considers that more than 100,000 books get published every year, but enough to keep me occupied.

But a few years ago, I decided I should read (or re-read) some of the classics – Dickens, Austen, the Bronté sisters, George Eliot even Tolkien. Reading these authors is not only entertaining, but instructional. While language, venues and manners change, human nature does not. This exerciset led me to Anthony Trollope. My parents had had a set of Trollope, but I never read him. He seemed intimidating. However, in 2011 I picked up Barchester Towers. I enjoyed it but found the characters difficult to track. For five years Mr. Trollope lay fallow. Finally, in 2016, I read The Warden, the first of the six Barsetshire novels. I was hooked. That same year I read Doctor Thorne. The characters became old friends. Last year I read Framley Parsonage and The Small House at Allington. I am now reading The last Chronicle of Barset, the final of the six books in the series, and am looking forward to starting the Parliamentary (or Palliser) series.

There are thousands of writers, and it is fun to try someone different, especially authors we read when in school or college – classics that have stood the test of time. I still like to read those I know. With the wind blowing and the rain coming down, old favorites like Charles McCarry and Lee Childs are as comfortable as a hot cup of cocoa. But we cannot spend our lives in a cocoon. No matter our age, we should challenge ourselves, and there is little that is more rewarding than re-reading a book we read sixty or seventy years ago. Now, with time to savor the story (and no one looking over our shoulder), we have the advantage of reading with a perspective unavailable to those in their teens.

Oh, and this essay should be shown to children and grandchildren who feel STEM programs alone lead to success. Remember, classics open the mind in a way an algebra text does not.