"Tit for Tat - Not a Good Strategy"

 

Sydney M. Williams

 

Thought of the Day

“Tit for Tat – Not a Good Strategy”

June 5, 2025

 

“All things are double, one against another. Tit for tat; an eye for an eye; a tooth for a tooth;

blood for blood; measure for measure; love for love. Give and it shall be given you.”

                                                                                                Attributed to Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)

 

“Tit for Tat: The infliction of an injury or insult in return for one that one has suffered,” Oxford English Dictionary. Wikipedia: “It is an alteration of tip for tap ‘blow for blow,’ first recorded in 1558.”

…………………………………………………………………….

 

When Donald Trump was sworn in as the 45^th President of the United States on January 20, 2017 I suspect he was as surprised to be there as anyone. He had been a successful real estate developer, and for thirteen years he hosted “The Apprentice,” a successful reality TV series. But he had never run for political office. As a businessman, he donated to both Jimmy Carter’s and Ronald Reagan’s campaigns in 1980. His political affiliations have changed: a Manhattan Republican in the 1980s; member of the Reform Party in 1999; a Democrat in 2001; and back to a Republican in 2009. By some, he will always be criticized for his changing political affiliations and his out-spoken manner. But he was democratically elected President.

 

For those who make their living in politics, Donald Trump’s success was a threat. His victory was incredulous to Republicans in the primaries and to Democrats in the general election. How could this “orange-haired” man who garbles the English language have won? How could an interloper beat them at their own game?

 

America is a different place than it was a generation or two ago. Civility has declined; anti-social and unethical behavior have increased; and violence has become more common and, worse, acceptable. Scam phone calls have risen by over 20% in each of the last five years. In 2023, the United States Capital Police (USCP) investigated 8,008 threats against members of Congress. A disturbing number of young Leftists cheered on the two attempts on Donald Trump’s life, as well as the attacks on Tesla dealerships. Anti-Semitism has increased, On May 21 a young Jewish couple, Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim, were shot and killed outside the Capital Jewish Museum. Four days later, in Boulder, Colorado, a man shouted, “Free Palestine,” as he threw Molotov cocktails at demonstrators, injuring fifteen men and women, as they marched in support of Israeli hostages held by Hamas.

 

Political parties have changed. The Democrat Party, once the Party of the working class and poor now appeals to wealthy, suburban whites, and monied groups like trial lawyers, hedge fund managers, and Wall Street tycoons. Like the switch of white southern Democrats to Republicans in the 1960s and ‘70s, former “country club” elitist Republicans, in the wake of Vietnam and Civil Rights, abandoned their traditional Party. Democrats have long dominated academia, but they have become more entrenched. As private sector unions lost members, Democrats lost interest, so concentrated on union leaders and on expanding public sector unions, especially teachers’. Republicans have picked up middle-class, working Americans. They have kept in their fold most religious groups, except Episcopalians. 

 

As well, the sense of what it means to be an American has been derailed by politicians from both parties whose leaders appeal to extremists. Politics has become more partisan. The economic divide between ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots,’ regardless of race, has widened. When Barack Obama was elected as the first black man to become President, instead of acknowledging the economic divide, he made race the issue. He squandered an opportunity to pull America together on race, to close the chasm, to acknowledge the vision and promise of Martin Luther King in his 1963 “I Have a Dream” speech: “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” That was not the path Mr. Obama chose to take.

 

Not surprisingly, the competent, but ungracious, Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 election to the political outsider Mr. Trump. During his first term as President, he was demonized by the Left, even called a Nazi. While he is coarse in speech and offensive in language, he was falsely accused of Russian collusion by his illiberal Democrat opponents – a story that originated in Mrs. Clinton’s campaign. The contempt for him was visceral. It was not just political. No President has ever been treated with the disdain he was. He had invaded the establishment’s sanctuary and succeeded. In their bid to destroy him, Democrats were supported by the Justice Department and joined by a chorus of media enablers. In unprecedented actions, he was impeached twice and indicted four times. And he lost re-election in 2020.

 

Yet after four years of Mr. Biden – a situation for which Democrats have no one to blame but themselves – Mr. Trump won the Presidency again. This time he increased his vote. Notably, he expanded his votes among those who have traditionally been Democrats – blacks, Hispanics, and the working class – those who Democrats have ignored, as they pursued their far-left progressive agenda. They condemned “harmful words,” yet allowed violent anti-Semitism protests on campuses; they opened the southern border to an influx of millions of illegal migrants, including many with criminal records; and they emphasized identity politics, including the allowing of biological men to compete against women in high school and college sports. They abandoned large portions of America’s middle classes.

 

Is revenge a motivating factor in some of Mr. Trump’s actions now? I suspect it is. I don’t support revenge, but I understand it. He is now accused of weaponizing the Justice Department, the same Justice Department that was weaponized against him. In Shakespear’s play Measure for Measure, the title refers to the principle of retributive justice, where actions are judged and punished accordingly – an eye for an eye, for example. In my opinion, it is that principle that has been the impetus behind much of Mr. Trump’s behavior early in his second term. I suspect he believes that those who are being penalized – like prestigious universities being challenged over recruitment and DEI policies, illegal migrants being deported and foreign college students with ties to the CCP having visas revoked – are receiving their just deserts. 

 

But revenge is alien to democratic principles. As a conservative, many of my virtue-signaling Leftist friends remind me of Little Jack Horner who pulled out a plum and, blithely, said, “What a good boy am I!” This while he spoiled the plum pie for others. When these friends condemn Mr. Trump as a tyrant and his supporters as ignorant rubes they should remember that we live in a democracy, and that Mr. Trump won the election. While I will never wear a MAGA hat, I voted for Mr. Trump and, given the option, I am glad I did. When we disagree, we can (and should) take issue even with those we support, and we should not be afraid to speak out against those we do not, but we should do so civilly. And we all should condemn the unacceptable rise in violence.  

"A Cauldron of Challenges"

Yesterday, a grandson, a graduate student in 20^th Century European history, texted me a copy of the front page from the October 1, 1938 New York Times: “Czech Rulers Bow, But Under Protest.” British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain had returned to London from meeting Hitler in Munich the previous day, declaring that, in offering Germany Czechoslovakia’s Sudetenland he had brought “peace in our time.” My grandson was reminded of that event after President Trump’s urged Ukraine’s President Zelensky to give up Crimea to Russia.   

 

…………………………………………………………

 

While Francis was not my favorite Pope, there is no question that he was a compassionate man, especially to the poor and those unable to care for themselves. However, his allowing China’s Communist Party to select (or approve) Bishops I thought was wrong, but Francis may have concluded that it was the only way the Church could exist in that despotic, secular country. I also have long felt that like so many Socialists, Francis failed to credit capitalism as being the principal (albeit imperfect) force in reducing poverty. One has only to compare life in the Democratic and capitalist West with the Socialist world.

 

Nevertheless, I wish him eternal life, and, having watched the movie Conclave, I eagerly await the results of next month’s Conclave.

 

Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“A Cauldron of Challenges”

April 25, 2025

 

“Double, double, toil and trouble;

Fire burn and cauldron bubble.”

                                                                                                                Macbeth, Act IV, Scene 1 (1606)

                                                                                                                William Shakespeare (1564-1616)

 

“The secret of change is to focus all your energy not on fighting the old, but on building the new.”

                                                                                                                Attributed to Socrates (c. 469 BC – 399 BC)

 

President Trump has achieved a few goals. Border crossings by illegal migrants have declined by close to ninety percent. Military recruitment is up, with Army recruitment at 15-year highs. DOGE has exposed waste and fraud in many government agencies, and woke ideology is on the run. And, unlike the Biden years, we know who is in charge at the White House. 

 

But in other respects Mr. Trump has been less successful. He is wrong, in my opinion, when he calls for the capitulation of Ukraine, and when he advocates for tariffs – a tax on American consumers. His on-again-off-again tariffs have wreaked havoc with the stock market, weakened the dollar, and caused a pause in the economy. A weak dollar would result in higher interest rates for U.S. Treasuries. While illegal migration poses cultural and dependency risks, globalization and a strong dollar have raised living standards, as the cost of consumables, measured in hours worked, have declined over the decades, due to manufacturing being done where it is most cost efficient, along with technological innovations. Stronger education standards, secure borders, and a tax code that encourages innovation and investment are what is needed, not barriers to free trade. And I fail to understand Mr. Trump’s love affair with cryptocurrencies.

 

……………………………………………………

 

This essay focuses on a few of the challenges we face. (There are, obviously, many others). Shakespeare’s three witches had filled their cauldron with fillets of fenny snakes, eyes of Newts, tongues of dogs, and other such delicacies, but the cauldron of which I write is filled with threats: federal debt and unfunded liabilities at record levels; interest rates that encourage borrowing and discourage savings; public schools that don’t educate; declining birthrates – a world-wide phenomenon; an imperialistic China; a revanchist Russia; a soon-to-be nuclear armed Iran; and, I would argue, an absence of moral judgement. 

 

As a percent of GDP, today’s federal debt exceeds the level reached in 1945 when it peaked at 121.2%. Then, the United States financed a large portion of the Allies needs to fight a global war. Currently, the debt to GDP ratio stands around 122%, and is estimated to rise further, as a projected $1.3 trillion deficit for fiscal 2025 will be added to the current $36.2 trillion in U.S. federal debt. Today, more than half the federal budget is spent on entitlements. None of this debt, of course, includes an estimated $73 trillion in unfunded liabilities, principally from Medicare and Social Security. The reason that deficits continue to increase is simple – we spend more than we take in. Resolution can only lie with higher taxes or reduced spending, or a combination of the two. Reduced spending penalizes recipients of government largesse. Increased taxes inhibit economic growth. Will anyone in Washington address this problem? 

 

Low interest rates encourage consumption and speculation, and they discourage savings. When Treasury rates are only a percent or two above inflation they offer little incentive, apart for foreigners who benefit (or have benefitted) from the strong dollar, which explains why they currently own about one third of all U.S. Treasuries publicly held. If Mr. Trump is successful, in achieving a weaker dollar one can expect foreign investors to fade. If they do, rates will rise, as domestic investors will demand higher returns. 

 

Thomas Jefferson believed that for a society to be self-governed it had to be “educated and free-thinking.” Yet, according to Pacific Research Institute 43% of high school students in the U.S. graduate illiterate and innumerate. A debate between Republicans and Democrats over whether boys can play on girls sports’ teams and use their bathrooms may be worth having, but it should not detract from the fact that not all our children are being taught to read, write and do simple arithmetic. Superintendents and principals need to be able to fire non-performing teachers, without fear of retribution from teachers’ unions.

 

Attention must be paid to the demographic crisis soon to confront us. Total Fertility Rates (TFR) measure the average number of children a woman is expected to bear in her lifetime. A TFR of 2.1 represents replacement rate. For the last fifty years, the TFR in the U.S. has been below replacement. Today, the TFR in the U.S. stands at 1.76. And during the last fifty years, the average age in the U.S. has risen from 27.6 to 38.5, even as the population increased by better than 50%, or about130 million. A little more than a third of that increase reflects legal immigrants. Additionally, current population numbers include illegal migrants. Nevertheless, births in the U.S. outnumbered deaths by approximately 380,000 in 2023. However, declining birthrates and an aging population pose economic and social risks. In the EU the situation is dire. Deaths outnumber births by more than a million, and the TFR for 2024 is estimated to have been 1.4, with the median age having risen from 31.3 to 42.5 over the past fifty years. Birthrates below replacement, with increasing longevity will have economic consequences, yet politicians and the media seem to care little about what could become a monumental challenge. “Attention must be paid,” as Linda Loman says to her husband in Death of a Salesman.

 

Overseas, China dominates the Pacific and is making inroads in Africa, Latin America and the Middle East through its Belt & Road initiatives. Putin’s Russia seems determined to restore its Tsarist boundaries, while Iran and North Korea threaten the peace in the Middle East and the Western Pacific. U.S. defense spending, as a percent of the federal budget, has declined from 24.3% in 1980 to 13.5% in 2024. At the same time interest expense in 1980, when the Ten-Year yielded 11.4%, has risen from 8.8% to 13.2%, even as the yield on the Ten-Year has fallen to 4.2%. World peace demands a militarily strong United States.

 

………………………………………………….

 

If blame for the challenges cited above were allocated fairly among our two political parties, there would be no one to manage government. Playing to the choir and grabbing headlines is more important than debating controversial subjects. If Diogenes were to wander the streets of Washington searching for an honest politician, he would have better luck looking for a Rainbow Eucalyptus Tree on the Tibetan Plateau.

 

Perhaps I exaggerate the threats. We have been in tight spots in the past – obviously during the Civil War, but also in the 1960s, when Vietnam and the Civil Rights movement caused bloody protests, campus shootings and assassinations. Nevertheless, today’s divisiveness is disturbing. We need as President a Lincoln-like figure, an individual capable of uniting the diverse strands of our people, a person with humor and possessed of moral certitude based on the Judeo-Christian heritage on which our nation was built.

 

After all, we are the United States. Surely such an individual must exist…somewhere in this great Country.

"Something is Rotten in the State of Denmark"

 

Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Something is Rotten in the State of Denmark^[1]”

September 5, 2024

 

“American politics is undergoing a profound change in its core pattern.”

                                                                                                                                Newt Gingrich (1943-)

                                                                                                                                New York Sun

                                                                                                                                August 29, 2024

 

When Marcellus utters Shakespeare’s immortal line, he speaks of the corruption that led to Hamlet’s father, King Hamlet, being murdered. When Mr. Gingrich wrote the words in the rubric, it reflected his opinion that corruption, incompetence and dishonesty have come to characterize American politics. One does not have to be in accord with all that Mr. Gingrich believes to agree that politics in the United States has become polarized and that people, in general, have become disenchanted with those who labor in the vineyards along the Potomac.  

 

Complaints about politics and political leaders are as old as civilization, but they have reached new heights in the U.S., and, in fact, in much of the West. A PEW Research study, conducted a year ago, concluded: “Just 4% of U.S. adults say the political system is working extremely or very well; another 23% say it is working somewhat well.” Things have worsened since. On August 21 of this year Statista Research put the approval rating for the U.S. Congress at 16 percent. Keep in mind, this is despite the 118^th Congress “being the most diverse Congress in American history.” Their report concluded that “nearly 60% of Americans have no confidence the parties can govern in a bipartisan way.”

 

When asked how they feel when they think of politics in the PEW study, 65% said they were “always/often exhausted”. Asked as to what words best described the current state of American politics, “divisive” and “corrupt” were the top choices. Members of Congress, especially those on the left, are famous for extolling wealth and income disparities. Yet, the median net worth of an individual member of Congress is more than five times the median net worth of American households. Wikipedia, in a list of presidents ranked by net worth, adjusted for inflation to 2022 U.S. dollars, shows that three of the last five U.S. Presidents head the list: Donald Trump, Barack Obama and Bill Clinton. (George W. Bush is twelfth and Joe Biden is tied with Eisenhower for twenty-second.) Last on the list is Harry Truman, who famously replied when offered a corporate board seat: “You don’t want me; you want the U.S. Presidency, and it’s not for sale.” Today, everything in politics is for sale, including access.

 

“Antiestablishment populism is on the rise in Europe, fueled not just by migration and economic and security fears, but also by a deeper trend: eroding confidence in governments’ ability to overcome these challenges;” so began an article in last Tuesdays The Wall Street Journal by Bertrand Benoit. This lack of confidence in government can be seen in recent elections in Italy, the UK, Germany, the Netherlands, and France. As for problems of inflation, migration and the war in Ukraine, there is, as Mr. Benoit wrote, “confidence is crumbling that elected governments can solve them.”

 

In the U.S., our history has become a cesspool of political correctness. Schools and colleges depict our forefathers as racists and colonizers who despoiled an idyllic Eden. Certainly, we should not revere the Founders of our nation as God-like figures, but we should acknowledge that slave holders like Washington, Jefferson, Madison and Monroe bequeathed us a government that gave us, over time, Lincoln and the Emancipation Proclamation, and then, a hundred years further on, Civil Rights. Is all perfect today? No. We should always strive to improve, but we should never lose sight of the fact that it has been our history of free speech, free enterprise and limited government that have been foundational to our culture and economic growth, the latter which has provided us with living standards unimaginable to our grandparents, even to our parents.

 

Without a common enemy to hate, such as Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union, we have lost our moral compass. The substitution of climate change as an “existential threat,” while popular among Western elitists, does not work. It is an excuse to justify more government control. The Earth’s climate has changed continuously over its billions of years of existence, long before man made his appearance. It will continue to change. Like all living things, man must adapt. It is true that man has used many of the Earth’s resources to improve his living standards, which certainly has had some effect on climate. But, as aspiration, ability, diligence, and free markets made him wealthier and gave him more leisure time, he became more conscious of his environment. When an individual is battling for subsistence he cares not what happens to his waste. The best way to improve the environment in the undeveloped world is to promote economic growth. 

 

The absence of morality is deadly. It can be seen in the attitude of Western politicians who apply a moral equivalence toward the democratic nation of Israel and the terrorist organization Hamas, which governs (or did govern) Gaza. When six hostages were recently shot execution-style by Hamas terrorists, the reaction by the White House (and most leaders in Europe) was to blame Israel along with Hamas, but specifically Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for failing to achieve a cease fire. Why have we lost our sense of right and wrong? The West is challenged in many places. Leaders of China want hegemony in the Pacific, Russia’s Putin wants to restore his country’s Soviet empire, and Iran would like to dominate the Middle East. America’s role should be that “shining city on the hill,” a phrase first used by Jesus in his Sermon on the Mount, then by John Winthrop in 1630, and 259 years later by Ronald Reagan – an example of what man is capable.  

 

I am not so cynical as to believe that someone, or some group, is deliberately trying to undermine our nation and its values – family, work, accountability and responsibility, courage, respect for others, individualism and unity, fairness, merit, care for those less fortunate – though it sometimes seems that way. What I do know is that something is wrong in our country, and in the West – it is the fissures that divide us; it is the sense of entitlement that permeates our bureaucracy and some of our people; it is the claim that exceptional achievements of thousands of individual Americans over hundreds of years was only possible because of a benevolent state. Newt Gingrich is right. Our politics is undergoing a profound (and disheartening) change. We should never be blind to our faults. We should always strive to improve our lot and that of those around us. But we should celebrate our successes, and we should learn from our failures. 

 

At its essence, the United States has been a virtuous country, as has been the West. Both provided individuals the freedom to succeed based on merit, which, in turn, has raised living standards for their citizens, and both have given promise of opportunities to millions who live elsewhere, those whose lives have been reduced by dictators and barbarians. Both have defended freedom. But when nations ignore the moral compass that allowed them to succeed, when they denigrate their history and disregard their Judeo-Christian heritage, they offer an opening to authoritarians, whether from the right or the left. That is what is rotten, and that is the risk the U.S. and the West face.

 

 

 

---

[1] William Shakespeare, Hamlet, Act I, Scene IV

"Time for a Third Party?"

                                                                     Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Time for a Third Party?”

February 16, 2024

 

“Third parties are like bees: once they have stung, they die.”

                                                                                                                                Richard Hofstadter (1916-1970)

                                                                                                                                The Age of Reform, 1955

 

As Professor Hofstadter wrote almost seventy years ago, third parties do not have an encouraging history in American politics. In 1912, Theodore Roosevelt’s Progressive “Bull Moose” Party handed the election to Woodrow Wilson. In 1924, Robert LaFollette’s Progressive Party garnered 16.6% of the popular vote, but probably did not affect the election’s outcome. As well, Strom Thurmond in 1948 and George Wallace in 1968 ran effective campaigns but did not affect elections in those years. However, Ross Perot’s Independent Party in 1992 probably cost George H.W. Bush his re-election.

 

John Templeton once said that the four most dangerous words in investing are “this time it’s different.” Those words are ordinarily applicable to third party candidacies. However, this year does seem different. Assuming that the two lead candidates stay the course – not a sure bet – November’s election will be between two of the widely unliked (and least qualified) candidates in American history[1].

 

With Robert Kennedy, Jr. already in the race and with No Labels standing in the wings, perhaps the most comparable election would be that of 1860, which fielded four candidates: Lincoln was the Republican candidate, Stephen Douglas the Democrat, John Breckinridge ran as a Lecompton Democratic candidate, and John Bell from the Constitutional Union Party. When the smoke cleared on November 6, 1860, Lincoln had won just under 40% of the popular vote, Douglas 29.5%, Breckinridge 18.2% and Bell 12.6%. However, in terms of Electoral College votes, Lincoln was the clear winner, with 180 votes out of 303 cast.

 

Voters are often told that a vote for a third party means a vote for the opposition. In other words, Democrat leaders today tell voters that a vote for Robert Kennedy, Jr. is in fact a vote for Donald Trump. History suggests their warnings are justified, as no third party candidate has ever won the White House. In Shakespeare’s The Tempest Antonio speaks to Sebastian: “What’s past is prologue.” 

 

But the past is not always prologue? Humans have advanced, driven by those who dared to experiment, to try something new. Consider the telegraph, railroads, telephones, cars, airplanes, space travel, computers, the integrated circuit, and artificial intelligence. Our Founders, in 1789, chose a new form of government. They looked to the past but created something new – a representative, republican democracy, in which the individual was paramount and government limited. Three equal and independent branches were devised to help prevent any one person or branch from taking control. The government born in Philadelphia was, as Lincoln proclaimed at Gettysburg eighty-seven years later, a new concept in human history, a “government of the people, by the people, for the people.”

 

Today’s two political parties did not exist in 1789. It was not until 1828 that the Democratic Party was formed, as a vehicle to help elect Andrew Jackson. The Republican Party was formed in 1854 by forces opposed to the expansion of slavery. Today, neither party is what it was a generation or two ago. The country club crowd of the northeast, once solidly Republican, has become decidedly Democratic. Internationalists of the 1950s, once solidly Republican, have become, under Mr. Trump, anti-globalists. 

 

Today, two aging men (though younger than me) – one with obvious declining cognitive powers and the other a tactless, uncouth individual who threatens to dismantle NATO – head both parties. Is it not time to seek a third way? Or, if not a third way, is it not time for leaders of both parties to recognize their flawed choices and nominate someone who can move the country forward in a manner acceptable to the majority of voters? I recall once having lunch in the Senate dining room in the early 1970s. I remember the sense of camaraderie that permeated the room – Republicans and Democrats dining together. Famously, President Reagan and House Speaker Thomas (“Tip”) O’Neil, while poles apart politically, enjoyed a mutually respectful and affectionate relationship. And similarly, Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich had a mutually beneficial meeting of the minds. But I cannot imagine President Biden enjoying a drink with Speaker Mike Johnson any more than I could have imagined former President Trump sitting down to exchange stories with former Speaker Nancy Pelosi. That loss of political camaraderie has become the people’s loss.

 

No Labels was launched ten years ago, initially among House members, as fault lines between the parties widened and deepened. Today, fifty House members, split evenly between Democrats and Republicans, meet regularly. The House effort is led by Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA). Five years ago, No Labels began an effort to organize a similar group in the Senate. Today, their leaders include Joe Manchin (D-WV), Susan Collins (R-ME), and Krysten Sinema (I-AZ). Their goal is to find common ground, at a time when extremists from both sides dominate their parties, along with news and social media platforms. 

 

Will a Third Party, like the mythical Phoenix arise from the ashes of today’s political conflagration? I am unsure. My hope is that both parties recognize that their current preferences for President will lead to more division at home and to a more dangerous world abroad. Ironically, Democrats hope Trump is Republicans’ choice, just as Republicans hope Biden heads the Democratic slate. 

 

As I have written before, the Democratic Party, being more disciplined, is more likely to drop the Biden-Harris ticket than Republicans to dump Trump. However, as a conservative, it is my hope that Republicans recognize the futility of sticking with the flawed and (nationally) unelectable Donald Trump. They have an opportunity with Nikki Haley who polls well against Mr. Biden. But will she gain the necessary votes in the upcoming primaries? She does not generate the fanaticism of Trump followers, but she appeals to a broader array of voters. If both parties stick with today’s leaders, a Third Party candidate seems, to this observer, a likely alternative.  

 

 

 

 

---

---

[1] To be clear, in my opinion, it is not age that is the problem; it is the mental condition of one and the character of the other. Both, in varying degrees, are corrupt and neither seems to appreciate history. As to who is most corrupt, I leave that for you to decide. There is no doubt that Mr. Biden is cognitively impaired and we, the public, have no idea who is the puppeteer pulling the strings in his administration.  There is no debate about Mr. Trump being a boorish, loose cannon in a complex and multi-cultural world when tolerance and grasp are needed. Worse, he has become an isolationist just as the world is turning more dangerous. However, Trump’s appeal, we should not forget, is to those millions of forgotten men and women ignored by identity politics, elitism, and political correctness.

"A Winter Morning"

 This morning is quite different than from the day eight days ago when I awoke to the first snowstorm of the year and was inspired to write this short essay.

 

Sydney M. Williams

 

More Essays from Essex

“A Winter Morning”

January 24, 2024

 

“You can’t get too much winter in the winter.”

                                                                                                                                Robert Frost (1874-1963)

                                                                                                                                “Snow”

                                                                                                                                Mountain Interval, 1916

 

For a New Englander born and raised, Robert Frost’s words ring true. Summer witnesses the smell of fresh flowers, soft breezes and warm temperatures, whose pleasures are enhanced because of winter’s snow, ice, and cold. We are reminded of how changing seasons reflect life’s journey, from spring’s birth through summer’s growth, to fall’s harvest and winters denouement – from nativity to death and resurrection. Or, as Shakespeare put it, through the voice of the ill-fated Gloucester, in Henry VI, Part 2:

 

“And after summer evermore succeeds

Barren winter, with his wrathful nipping cold:

So cares and joys abound, as seasons fleet.”

 

As I roll out of bed – figuratively, not literately – on this morning following winter’s first storm, visions of past winter’s mornings dance through my head: as a child, the prospect of school closure; as a teenager, the anticipation of training with my school’s ski team; as a householder, the chore of shoveling the front steps; as a city-dweller, the necessity of trudging through snow-laden streets to my office.

 

But now in retirement my obligations are few, and I appreciate nature’s bounty. There are few scenes so beautiful as snow falling on a winter’s morning, especially when one knows that he does not have to leave his cozy and well-provisioned apartment. There are books, the internet, and a television that can transport me to distant places and faraway times. There is a fireplace – sadly, electric, but a fireplace just the same – to warm the soul and the room.

 

Winter is a special time, something recognized by poets and artists: “In winter I get up at night/ And dress by yellow candlelight,” wrote Robert Louis Stevenson in his 1885 collection, A Child’s Garden of Verses. Or Christina Rossetti’s 1872 poem “In the Bleak Midwinter,” which begins, “In the bleak midwinter, frosty wind made moan/ Earth stood hard as iron, water like a stone.” Visual artists have long used winter scenes to capture and express feelings. In our apartment hang many such paintings, including a 2014 oil by Utah’s Warren Neary, “Winter Solstice.” It shows cattle on a cold snowy morning, with a hint of the rising sun through a snow-laden sky, outside a barn from whose windows warm lights dimly glow.

 

Even with the cold and the ice, we should not rush the days away. Each is special, as are the changing seasons. Winter is, after all, a harbinger of spring.  Hibernating animals, from bears and hedgehogs to turtles and snails, now in mid-slumber, will soon leave their nests as warm days restore the earth. The early 20^thCentury poet Annette Wynne who specialized in children’s poetry wrote: “One, two, winter’s through/ Three, four, spring’s at the door.”

 

But for now, I look through frosty windows at the new-fallen snow and smile.

"Election Thoughts (or Hopes?"

 I don’t know about you, but I will be glad when this election is over. Rancor runs high; ads overflow my mailbox; road signs desecrate the fall scenery, and we shy away from those whose political views differ. Thank God for phone ID, so I don’t have to answer the phone. Early voting, in my opinion, has made things worse, as millions of people do not wait until all the real news has been reported – or as much of it as will be reported. In a week, the wait will be over…or will it?

 

Sydney M. Williams

 

Thought of the Day

“Election Thoughts (or Hopes?)”

November 1, 2022

 

“You call my candidate a horse thief, and I call yours a lunatic, and we both know it’s just

election day. It’s an American custom, like eating corn on the cob. And afterwards, we

settle down quite peaceably and agree we’ve got a pretty good country – until next election.”

                                                                                                           Stephen Vincent Benét (1898-1943)

                                                                                                           We Stand United and Other Radio Scripts, 1944

 

Otto von Bismarck reputedly said: “People never lie so much as after a hunt, during a war or before an election.” Never having gone hunting or been in combat, I assume that the “Iron Chancellor” was correct about those events. However, having watched elections for seventy years, I know he is right about politicians who give speeches that exaggerate past accomplishments, denigrate opponents, and fabricate plans for the future. But, as the author-poet Benét is quoted in the rubric above, doing so is “an American custom, like eating corn on the cob.” The difference today, though, is that elections don’t end on election day: witness Hillary Clinton in 2016, Stacy Abrams in 2018, and Donald Trump in 2020.  

 

While there are issues that concern us all, we have politicians today, as one pundit put it, who have even bigger issues – ones of excessive egos and acute sensitivity to criticism. Nevertheless, issues are plentiful: abortion and a woman’s right to choose; inflation, which is hitting the pocket books of everyone; the economy – while third quarter preliminary GDP (+2.6%) was a welcome relief after two quarters of negative growth, rapid inflation and escalating interest rates portend stagflation; a surfeit of jobs and a decline in labor participation rates suggest a dearth of willing workers; education, where the drop in test scores accelerated during Covid, but the decline began earlier; immigration, where a needed increase in legal immigration is being held hostage to a flood of illegal immigrants; crime, which has increased across the country, but disproportionately in inner cities; discrimination against Asians and Jews, reminiscent of the anti-Semitism of the 1920s, scare mongering over climate change by radicals with little understanding of history and climatology; and the teaching of a false narrative regarding the founding of the United States, along with the cancellation of ideas that do not conform to progressive ideology.

 

Typically, midterm elections favor the “out” party, and polls suggest 2022 will be no exception. No matter which party wins, though, differences abound and have become violent: last week’s attack on Paul Pelosi, husband of Speaker Nancy Pelosi, in his San Francisco home; the June 2022 arrest of a “heavily armed” man outside the home of Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and the shooting of six people, including Representative Steve Scalise in June 2017. While there is little doubt in my mind that all three incidents were the work of a mentally deranged individual, politics is, in part, responsible. But the real issues that confront us, as mentioned above, are numerous and include concerns about the cultural and moral direction of the Country, along with technological advances that supersede man’s ability to easily adapt. Pundits deem all elections as “the most important of our generation.” This one is no exception.

 

However, the point I want to make is to urge candidates and voters, alike, to take a deep breath. No matter what happens on November 8^th, the Republic will survive. The United States is generally considered the world’s oldest, continuing democracy. Like other democracies, the United States has adapted to changing times and customs; but representative government, rule of law and individual freedom have characterized this Nation through enormous changes, conflicts, and challenges, including the burning of the Capitol and a Civil War. The Nation has stood for almost 250 years. It will continue to stand. 

 

Instead of predicting individual races – which others, more qualified than I, do – I want to make a larger point of hope. Should Republicans win control of the House and the U.S. Senate, which some polls indicate and which I believe will happen, they should celebrate their victory. But they should try to smooth the shards that rend the fabric of our Nation, and they should acknowledge that victory would have been impossible without the votes of Independents and some Democrats. They should not violate their principles, but their tone should be conciliatory. They should take the political high road, which today is barren of traffic. Lizzie Post’s and Daniel Post Senning’s centennial edition of their great-great grandmother Emily Post’s 1922 Etiquette is a reminder that behavior matters. The original – not the new, politically correct centennial edition – would be a proper holiday gift for all politicians.  

 

There should be no attempts to exert revenge. Extremism is okay on the political hustings, but it does not belong in the halls of Congress or in state legislatures. Humility should replace arrogance; respect, contempt; humor, drama; and clarity, obfuscation. And all politicians should heed the advice my father once gave me: You do not listen when your mouth is open. 

 

Stephen Vincent Benét wrote the words in the rubric that heads this essay in 1943, while our nation was united to defeat Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. Yet his words are relevant today. The course of this Country’s history is long, and it varies, up and down hills and around corners. My grandchildren, God willing, will see the tricentennial of this Nation’s founding, and some of them may live to see the arrival of the 22^nd Century. Regardless, their children and grandchildren will. Our time on Earth is but a small mark on the continuum of history. We live in a remarkable Country – for which we should be forever grateful – the envy of the world. And it was not through our own efforts, but by pure chance, that most of us are here. 

 

But politics has become nasty. As Marcellus says to Horatio in Shakespeare’s Hamlet, “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.”  Something seems rotten in Washington. There is no accountability. No one in the Biden Administration assumed responsibility for the decision to hinder fossil fuel production, which has been one factor in higher energy prices. The NEA blamed everyone but themselves for poor student performance. The Federal Reserve ignored the impact of a decade of abnormally low interest rates on increased debt and subsequent inflation? Two questions, as the election nears: Is the leftist culture of self-aggrandizement combined with loathing for those with conservative values a passing fad, or is it a deliberate attempt to change the political calculus? Will this election make a difference?

 

The answers are unknown, but voting is important. A definition of madness is to expect different results by doing the same thing over and over again. Sending the governing party back would not seem wise. Among our responsibilities as citizens is to leave the Country a little better than we found it – advice largely ignored by the current batch in Washington. Winners next week could start with an olive leaf.

"Self-doubt"

 What the Durham trial has exposed is not getting the press it and the people deserve. The decision by the Clinton campaign to deliberately instigate a false story of Russian collusion by Donald Trump – no matter what one thought of him – was the dirtiest trick ever played in Presidential politics. It tells us what sort of a President Mrs. Clinton would have been. Why is this not getting more coverage? Can you imagine the headlines if roles were reversed?

 

Sydney M. Williams

30mBokum Road – Apartment 314

Essex, CT 06426

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Self-Doubt”

May 24, 2022

 

“The greater the artist, the greater the doubt.

Perfect confidence is granted to the less talented as a consolation prize.”

                                                                                                                                Robert Hughes (1938-2012)

                                                                                                                                Art critic

                                                                                                                                Time magazine, June 10, 1996

 

Self-doubt is usually considered a negative. And when it dominates one’s activities it is. In Measure for Measure, William Shakespeare has Lucio speak to Isabella: “Our doubts are traitors, and make us lose the good we might win, by fearing to attempt.” A recent article in National Review, signed by 59 conservatives, was titled “America’s Crisis of Self-Doubt:” “Our traditional values of fair play, free speech and religious liberty are trampled by inflamed ideologies determined to impose their will by force and fear.” That is all true, but the real problem is the over-confidence of the woke who, with religious zeal, see society “as archaic, unfair, and racially biased.” As a governor of impetuous behavior, self-doubt is a positive.

 

Questioning one’s beliefs can lead to changing one’s opinions, or to strengthening one’s resolve. Self-doubt is akin to skepticism; the former is the questioning – not the dismissal – of one’s abilities, while the latter seeks proof of an allegation. Recall the story of Jesus and the Apostle Thomas, known as “Doubting Thomas.” He refused to believe in the resurrected Jesus until he could see and feel Jesus’ crucifixion wounds. As a skeptic, he wanted evidence to justify his belief. Abraham Lincoln was plagued with self-doubt regarding his ability to manage the Civil War, yet doubt caused him to work harder and to achieve a better understanding. John F. Kennedy had self-doubt as to whether he could live up to the expectations of his father and the memory of his dead brother. But he gathered inner strength, as doubts faded and confidence was restored. More recently, Elon Musk’s evolvement from a “moderate Democrat” to a “moderate Republican” was a consequence of doubting his loyalties to a party that hewed too far to the left.

 

Self-doubt, when one is weighing competing political policy options, is healthy, as it allows one to use logic, reason and common sense to overcome skepticism before reaching a conclusion. Extremists, who see no need for self-doubt, have taken over our politics, especially on the left. In an interview with the Claremont Review of Books, Norman Podhoretz was quoted regarding the struggle within our country’s culture: “One side…believes that America is a force for good in itself,” while the other side claims, “America is evil in itself…” As neither party tries to understand the other, compromise is impossible. Quoting Daniel Bell, Barton Swaim wrote recently in The Wall Street Journal: “The tendency to convert concrete issues into ideological problems, to invest them with moral color and emotional charge is to invite conflicts which can only damage a society.” A plethora of moral certitude and a lack of self-doubt is common among those on the left dubbed “virtucrats” by Joseph Epstein – a term he defined in his 2002 book Snobbery: The American Version as “any man or woman who is certain that his or her political views are not merely correct but deeply, morally righteous in the bargain.” – “Often wrong, but never in doubt,” defines the path they follow.

 

Self-doubt would have questioned the claim that on-line radicalization and racism were the sole motivations behind Payton Gendron’s decision to kill ten black people in Buffalo last week. Self-doubt would have asked: Did not mental illness also play a role? Why have politicians left the mentally ill to live on streets in cities like San Francisco, Lon Angeles, New York, St. Louis and Austin? Self-doubt would have been a good thing for members of the media who accepted without question the now debunked Trump Russian collusion story, a story created by the Clinton campaign in 2016. Self-doubt may have prevented the Biden Administration’s embarrassing creation of the Orwellian-named Disinformation Governance Board, which has now, thank God, been abandoned. Media and political leaders could learn from William Butler Yeats’ poem, “The Second Coming:” “The best lack all conviction, while the worst/Are full of passionate intensity.”

 

When I was in high school, members of the debate team were assigned which side of the resolution to argue. If assigned the affirmative, the next week we might have to argue the negative. While the purpose was to hone one’s debating skills, these guidelines served to remind us that there are two sides to issues. Being able to see two sides – a trait abetted by self-doubt – plays a vital role in composing intelligent and defensible opinions and may change or reinforce one’s beliefs.

 

My purpose, in this essay, is not to suggest that fervency in one’s beliefs is wrong, but that opinions should be based on empiricism, logic and common sense. Self-doubt plays a role in better understanding the issues we face, and it is always most wanted where it is least exercised. It is the antithesis of self-doubt, the religious-like zealotry of extremists, that is the most dangerous. Mainstream media does a good job of calling out the far-right, but they ignore the self-anointed far-left who see themselves as the rightful determiners as to what to read, speak and believe. That is where danger lurks.