Showing posts with label blaming the victim. Show all posts
Showing posts with label blaming the victim. Show all posts

Thursday, April 14, 2016

Donald Trump: American Demagogue

A piece in Salon looks at movie that looks at the late Hannah Arendt who has been gone for many years.  What is interesting about the movie is how it demonstrates similarities to Adolph Hitler's fascism and what is being peddled by Donald Trump.  Both play on human ignorance and baser instincts.  It is important to never forget how Hitler came to power and how he played on Germans' sense of victimhood and promised to bring back greatness to the German Reich.  Here are article highlights: 
Arendt’s central obsessions — war, totalitarianism, genocide, mass migration and displacement, and the ambiguous nature of human rights — are at least as relevant as ever. In the dismal and farcical age of Donald Trump, we badly need something like the scathing, cleansing force of Arendt’s intellect. There are moments in “Vita Activa: The Spirit of Hannah Arendt,” an urgent and often startling documentary from Israeli director Ada Ushpiz, where I could feel her trying to reach across the decades and talk to us.
Arendt didn’t have a high opinion of human nature or human group behavior, and given her life experience that’s understandable. She was a woman of extraordinary intellectual gifts at a time when there was essentially no such thing as a female philosopher, or even a female academic. As Ushpiz’s film lays out in detail, Arendt was a child of privilege in pre-war Germany and then a Jewish war refugee and then an increasingly controversial celebrity who became widely viewed as a traitor to her own people. 
In a passage quoted by Ushpiz, which I believe is from the 1951 “Origins of Totalitarianism,” Arendt proposes that regimes like Nazism or Stalinism thrive by creating narratives that confer imaginary order upon the chaos and randomness of history. Human beings long for coherent stories that explain why bad things happen, Arendt says, even when those stories are delusional and dangerous. When fueled by enduring political or psychological currents like nationalism and racism, such fictional narratives become the justification for war and genocide and other historical crimes. To cite the obvious example from Arendt’s lifetime, if the social chaos and struggling economy of Germany in the 1930s was caused by a predatory Jewish conspiracy that had drained the German people of their life force, then everything made sense and the nation could be united toward a common goal and against a common enemy.
I doubt I need to belabor the point: There is one 2016 presidential candidate who has prospered beyond anyone’s wildest dreams by constructing just that kind of narrative, albeit an especially shapeless and nonsensical one.
Trump’s famous promise to build that wall along the southern border — and somehow make Mexico pay for it — at a time when the population of undocumented immigrants is steadily declining, is more like an infantile fantasy than a policy proposal. His vow to bar Muslims from entering the country, in the face of irrational panic and an exaggerated terrorist threat, is pandering of the worst kind.  . . . those are like plot points in the amorphous Trumpian movie-narrative that whatever went wrong in America is somebody else’s fault, indeed almost anybody else’s. It’s more like a field of generalized suspicion and loathing than a coherent story: America’s innate greatness has been chewed away by the Muslims, the Mexicans, the blacks, the gays, the feminists, the transgender bathroom users, the liberal elite, the intellectual elite, the bipartisan political establishment and damn near everybody else who isn’t Trump or his downscale white audience.
Ushpiz makes a number of bold choices in “Vita Activa” that might not have been possible in an Israeli documentary even 10 years ago. She begins with newsreel footage of the Nazi death camps and the immediate postwar period, much of it from U.S. Army color films I’ve never seen before. . . . In this film we hear Hitler talk, with subtitles — and he sounds a lot more like Donald Trump than I expected.
If you believe the Führer’s legendary oratory was all fervent, strident screeching about the evils of the Jews and the perfidy of the Allied nations, well, it wasn’t. Hate speech is a key ingredient of the fascist dictator’s rhetorical mix, as Arendt might put it, but far from the only one. In a speech Ushpiz shows us, Hitler’s approach is strikingly Trumpian: a few nonspecific references to the enemies who are besieging and undermining the Reich, blended into a glowing portrait of a paradisiacal future of full employment and universal prosperity, dominated by a rising generation of healthy, strong and “peace-loving” young Germans. It was relentlessly upbeat, and strongly resonant of Trump’s vow to “make America great again” without defining what that means or what it might involve, or his promises that his leadership will bring a new era of “winning” after decades of “losing,” if irritating impediments like the constitutional separation of powers can be overcome.
[Trump]  reflects the all-too-human currents of vapidity and weakness that made Hitler possible, and that drove Hannah Arendt nuts.


Sunday, September 20, 2015

My Policy on Publishing Comments

In authoring this blog, I do not hide my identity.  I expect nothing less from those who leave comments if they expect them to be published.  I do not give a platform for cowards who seek to attack me personally or preach to me about why I am going to Hell - there have been MANY such anonymous comments over the years, some even threatening physical violence and/or death - or who try to dispute my views without having the courage to identify themselves.  For a time I only allowed comments from those registered through Google, Open ID or other sites such sites so that I could track potentially dangerous/threatening comments.   A while back I reopened comments to unregistered individuals, but retained the ability to approve or disapprove whether the comments were published.

Recently I wrote about  Robert Cunningham, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Syracuse, New York, the diocese I grew up in until going away to college, who testified under oath that the victims of predator priest shared in culpability with the predatory priests who sexually molested them.  I noted that his mindset is akin to that of those who are only too ready to blame female rape victims of "having asked for it." 

This was too much for some sheep like individual seemingly from the Syracuse area who left a harangue that Bishop Cunningham was "blameless"  and that the story had been tainted and twisted by both the local media outlets and S.N.A.P. , an organization notorious for anti-Catholic actions and Catholic Church hatred."  There was much more, but given the cowardice of the commentor, it will never be published.  If this individual wants to have his/her comment published, then grow a spine and be willing to identify yourself. 

I would encourage readers who want their comments published - whether you agree with me or not - to have the guts to identify yourself. 

Saturday, June 20, 2015

Rick Perry: Charleston Massacre An 'Accident' Due To Drugs, Manipulated By Obama To Ban Guns





The sickness of the far right continues to be demonstrated by the unbelievable thinks being said by Republicans and others to avoid admitting that the mass murders in Charleston were a racially motivated act of domestic terrorism.   It seems that any and every excuse is more acceptable than admitting reality - and the responsibility of the GOP's dog whistle racism and refusal to pass laws that would lessen the insane number of guns in the hands of those who do not need to have them.  As Barack Obama noted, no other advanced nation has the gun carnage that is the norm in America.  Exemplifying the right's batshitery, Rick Perry (there REALLY must be something in Texas' water) described the murders as an "accident" fueled by drugs that Barack Obama has manipulated.  True to form, Perry later claimed he had "misspoken."  Meanwhile, Charles Cotton, a longtime board member of the National Rifle Association, blamed the deaths on one of the victims for opposing concealed carry laws.  Right Wing Watch looks at Perry's lunatic comments:



In an interview today with Steve Malzberg of Newsmax, former Texas Gov. Rick Perry described the mass shooting at an African American church in Charleston earlier this week as an “accident” that was possibly caused by the over-prescription of medication.   A Perry campaign aide now says that the former governor misspoke in the interview when he used the word “accident.” 

Perry and Malzberg kicked off the discussion of the shooting by attacking President Obama for mentioning the failure to pass gun reform. Perry, a GOP presidential candidate, said that the president is trying to “take the guns out of the hands of everyone in this country.”

“This is the MO of this administration, any time there is an accident like this — the president is clear, he doesn’t like for Americans to have guns and so he uses every opportunity, this being another one, to basically go parrot that message,” Perry said.

Instead of talking about guns, Perry said, we should be talking about prescription drugs.  . . . He added that while the shooting was “a crime of hate,” he didn’t know if it should be called a terrorist attack.

As for Cotton's batshitery,  here are excerpts from Mother Jones:


Gun rights activists have been out in force since the massacre at Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina, once again blaming the slaughter on so-called gun-free zones, and claiming that an armed citizen could have otherwise stopped the attack. It's an argument that the gun lobby has used for many years, but on Thursday afternoon it was marked by a brazen new low with comments from Charles Cotton, a longtime board member of the National Rifle Association. Cotton wrote on a Texas gun-rights forum that slain pastor and South Carolina state Sen. Clementa Pinckney was responsible for the murders of his congregants because of his opposition to looser concealed-carry laws.

"Eight of his church members, who might be alive if he had expressly allowed members to carry handguns in church, are dead," Cotton said. "Innocent people died because of his political position on the issue."


No one who has watched the horror unfold in Charleston doubts that the killer's motivation was infused with racial hatred. And to suggest that gun restrictions were the root cause of the bloodbath isn't just callous—it's also plain wrong.


As Mother Jones has previously reported, there has never been any evidence that mass shooters picked their targets based on gun regulations; to the contrary, data from scores of cases shows perpetrators had other specific motivations for where they attacked, including racial hatred. The idea that armed citizens stop crimes in the United States has also been wildly exaggerated by the gun lobby, as a new study based on federal data reaffirms.

Cotton's comments have since been deleted from TexasCHLforum.com, where he is listed as a site administrator. He did not reply to a request for further comment. In a statement on Friday to Politico, the NRA distanced itself from Cotton's rhetoric, saying individual board members "do not have the authority to speak for the NRA."

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

More Blaming Their Victims by the Christianists

One of the favorite memes of the Christianists is that LGBT individuals have purportedly more mental health issues and, if one believes the Christianist hate merchants, unstable relationships and promiscuity issues. Never mind that to the extent theses claims are true, much of the causation traces directly back to the Christianists who strive virtually daily to make our lives Hell and denigrate our humanity. As a piece in Huffington Post notes, just recently the conservative, religious website LifeSiteNews in response to Newsweek's recent cover story on sex addiction: "[H]omosexuals are known for having superficial, short-term relationships and hundreds of lifetime sex partners..." Meanwhile, of course, it's the evangelical Christians who have the highest divorce rate in the country. Here are highlights from the Huffington Post article that ties LGBT dysfunction directly back to the poison that the Christianists continue to sow:

Support for gay marriage is on the rise. Every new survey shows greater tolerance and greater acceptance of the fact that homosexuality is a personally integral and relational truth that warrants equal rights.

With this support, we also see the rise of greater diversity in gay culture depicted by the media. Certainly the suburban gay parent is a fairly recent standard prototype in the collective consciousness that has gained traction from popular fiction, namely Modern Family and The Kids Are All Right, and from real-life celebrity parents like Rosie O'Donnell and Neil Patrick Harris.

The suburban gay parent does much to humanize the prevailing stereotype that depicts lesbians and gay men solely as promiscuous and unstable, propagated just last month by the conservative, religious website LifeSiteNews . . . .

I have to wonder about the degree to which any so-called "deviant" lifestyle traits displayed by LGBT people are ultimately an inherent psychological reaction to institutionalized homophobia at every level.

Let's take this trip. First, there's the closet, this toxic idea that it's not OK to be gay, compelling LGBT children to hide their truth. Gay kids live in silence for fear of the repercussions of disclosure, which can include rejection, abandonment, and bullying to the point of suicide. Gay bullying is perpetrated by peers, parents, teachers, community leaders, and world leaders.

While many minorities suffer oppression, from disenfranchisement to outright discrimination to persecution, few minorities additionally experience such extreme degrees of intimidated relational repression during formative years as the LGBT community.

One of the roots of sex addiction is an inability to cope with trauma and shame, feelings that LGBT people may struggle with as a community more so than their non-LGBT counterparts.
However, gay sex addiction is no different from straight sex addiction.

Still, there can be impenetrable denial on the part of the gay sex addict, who often equates promiscuity with personal empowerment, a self-avowed lifestyle choice that expresses hard-won gay rights. Likewise, sex addiction treatment via professionals or 12-step support can appear as a moralistic judgment against LGBT freedoms . . . .

Tuesday, August 05, 2008

The Insidious "Choice Myth"

A new op-ed editorial in the Ventura County Star, entitled "14-year-old Brandon McInerney: Ventura County's Sacrificial Lamb," concerning the murder of Larry King underscores why defeating the myth disseminated by Christianists that sexual orientation is a "choice" is ever so critical to the furtherance of LGBT rights and putting an end to opinions implied from this editorial. The anti-gay organizations that keep the choice myth alive know exactly what they are doing and they do it precisely so that LGBT individuals can be blamed for their orientation and thus held accountable/blamed for whatever evil or act of violence that befalls them. While the author, Michael Mehas (pictured at left) a Ventura attorney who has previously written a book based on a juvenile murder case, never says it, the undercurrent of the editorial is that Larry King somehow asked to be murdered by choosing to be different and not conforming.
*
True, it's always easy to try to make excuses for juveniles, but at 14, Brandon McInerney knew full well that bringing a gun to school and putting two bullets into the back of Larry King's head was wrong. His action of bringing the gun to school shows on its face that the killing was premeditated, a requirement for a first degree murder charge in most jurisdictions. King's killing was no sudden act of passion that occurred without some careful planning by MsInerney. Here are highlights from Mehas' op-ed which in my view tries to shift blame to Larry King for his own murder (or anyone else other than McInerney):
*
Because of the way the prosecutor charged the case, Brandon's age, domestic circumstances and the situation of Larry King's sexual advances become irrelevant to Brandon's case. There will now be no reason to consider the fact the defendant was so young when the crime was committed, that if he were 19 days younger, he would be legally unfit to be tried as an adult. There will be no mitigating circumstances to consider. The court may never hear the facts regarding how Brandon appeared crazed by his victim, a teenager himself who was admittedly gay, who teased and taunted Brandon, which humiliated the 14-year-old in front of his fellow students. There were reports that Larry's behavior had caused problems with other boys as well.
*
Instead of counseling the victim about his behavior, and Brandon, too, witnesses claim school officials appeared more intent on nurturing Larry as he explored his sexuality. They allowed him to come to school wearing feminine makeup and accessories and they downplayed the turmoil that his behavior was causing on campus.
*
Brandon is going to stand trial in adult court, and he is going to pay severely for what he did. Though considered too young to buy alcohol or cigarettes, sign rental agreements or vote, he will be held to the same degree of culpability as an adult, and face adult penalties, and he will go to prison for the rest of his life.
*
Trying Brandon as an adult does not serve us in terms of bringing justice to the issue. What would bring justice was if Brandon were given the chance to mature and learn socially acceptable behavior. But, if he must be charged in an adult court, then levy him with charges that would allow a judge to consider his age, his personal-life situation and the circumstances surrounding his crime. These mitigating circumstances are certainly more relevant than the Ventura County district attorney considers them to be.
*
Mehas is clearly more concerned with the rights and sensibilities of the murderer rather than the victim who will have no chance to mature or do anything else thanks to Brandon's homophobia and bigotry. One reason I could never be a defense defense attorney is that I could not in good conscience try to defend someone I deemed guilty. Some attorneys give the appearance of having no conscience whatsoever.