Posts Tagged ‘George Washington’

Conclusion of The Plot to Betray America

February 23, 2020

The title of this post is identical to the first part of a title of a book by Malcom Nance. The remainder of the title is How Team Trump Embraced Our Enemies, Compromised Our Security, and How we Can Fix It. This is his third book on how Trump is destroying democracy. Nance writes, “I have written numerous books on intelligence tradecraft, counterterrorism, the rise and fall of the Islamic State and Al Qaeda, and the fundamentals of the Russian plot to hack the American elections. However, nothing done by the worst terrorists filled me with more horror than realizing that Alexander Hamilton’s “unprincipled man”—the American-grown autocrat that the founding fathers had warned the nation about some two hundred years earlier—had finally cheated his way into the Oval Office with the assistance of an ex-KGB officer. This was not only an insult to all Americans living in a democracy but to all of us who have served in America’s military and public service to defend her.” Nance continues, “The worst part of the story is how easily one-third of the nation has been brainwashed into backing a man who thought the pinnacle achievement of his life would be to construct a building emblazoned with the word Trump in Moscow, the capital of our enemy. This American story is a shameful, sorrowful tale the likes of which we should be seriously embarrassed about.”

It also appears that General Ulysses S. Grant had a certain prescience regarding the future of the United States: “If we are to have a contest in the near future of our natural existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason and Dixon’s but between patriotism and intelligence on one side and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other.”

Being less prescient than Grant, George Washington wrote to the Marquis de Lafayette about the separation of powers under the Constitution: “The general Government is arranged that it can never be in danger of degenerating into a monarchy, an Aristocracy, or any other despotic or oppressive form so long as there shall remain any virtue in the body of the People.” It is clear that there is no virtue in Trump or the Republican Party. How much virtue remains in the body of the people awaits judgment.

Nance notes that Trump has seemed hell-bent on destroying the pillars of national security while acting as if he was increasing them. Russia has been so pleased with Trump’s work that Alexander Dugin, Vladimir Putin’s extremist philosopher, claimed that “the peak of American dominance is behind us.” Nance writes, that “it would appear that Trump sought to ensure that this was made a reality.

In Helsinki Trump forbade the presence of any staff and once again met Putin for two hours privately with only their interpreters present. Trump took the notes of the interpreter and forbid her to reveal what was discussed.

Trump attacked and continues to attack the FBI and the world’s best intelligence agencies that have documented the support Russia provided to Trump. The Russians not only supported Trump but also fomented discontent among different groups in the United States. When not only the size, but also the sophistication of their campaigns is considered, it is clear that Trump would not have won (and remember he did not win the popular vote) without their aid. It is also clear that he is shutting down our intelligence agencies so that the Russians will have a free hand in his re-election.

Even if the Democrats manage to overcome this interference and manage to win the election, Trump will likely declare fraud and refuse to leave the White House. Shortly thereafter he will likely declare himself president for life. Remember all the charges and lawsuits he is subject to if he does leave office. Perhaps there will be negotiations for the dropping of all pending and future charges, so he will leave the White House for his own dacha in Russia.

So what measures might be deployed to prevent this disaster? Russian disinformation expert Nina Jankowicz wrote in her article The Disinformation Vaccination, “What we need is something familiar to many who have worked in foreign assistance: capacity building. But rather than mounting such an effort abroad, we should pursue it for our own people. It’s a harder, longer process, but one that seeks to move beyond band-aids and vaccinate against the virus, prioritizing the citizens who fall victim to disinformation.”

Finland has successfully deployed the following digital literacy solutions:
*Equip every citizen with digital skills and educate them in digital literacy.
*Strengthen and support an independent media and fact checkers.
*Adapt electoral laws that are sensitive and adaptive to the digital era.

Nance writes, “There can be only one solution when a tyrant like Trump raises his hand: Impeachment.” Unfortunately impeachment is insufficient. The Republican Senate, in spite of overwhelming evidence, refused to convict.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2020. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

The New Wars for Attention and Power

January 22, 2019

This is the tenth post in a series of posts on a book by P.W. Singer and Emerson T. Brooking titled “Likewar: The Weaponization of Social Media.” The title of this post is identical to the subtitle of the title “Win the Net, Win the Day” of a chapter in the book.

Brian Jenkins declared in a 1974 RAND Corporation report, “Terrorism is theater,” that became one of terrorism’s foundational studies. The difference between the effectiveness of the Islamic State and that of terror groups in the past was not the brains of the ISIS; it was the medium they were using. Mobile internet access could be found everywhere; smartphones were available in any bazaar. Advanced video and image editing tools were just one illegal download away, and an entire generation was well acquainted with their use. For those who weren’t, there were free online classes offered by a group called Jihadi Design. It promised to take ISIS supporters ‘from zero to professionalism’ in just a few sessions. The most dramatic change from terrorism was that distributing a global message was as easy as pressing ”send,” with the dispersal facilitated by a network of super-spreaders beyond any one state’s control.

ISIS networked its propaganda pushing out a staggering volume of online messages. In 2016 Charlie Winter counted nearly fifty different ISIS media hubs, each based in different regions with different target audiences, but all threaded through the internet. These hubs were able to generate over a thousand “official” ISIS releases, ranging from statements to online videos, in just a one-month period.

They spun a tale in narratives. Human minds are wired to seek and create narratives. Every moment of the day, our brains are analyzing new events and finding them in thousand of different narratives already stowed in our memories. In 1944 psychologists Fritz Heider and Marianne Simmel produced a short film that showed three geometric figures (two triangles and a circle) bouncing off each other at random. They screened the film to a group of research subjects and asked them to interpret the shapes’ actions. All but one of the subjects described these abstract objects as living beings; most saw them as representations of humans. In the shapes’ random movements they expressed motives, emotions, and complex personal histories such as: the circle was “worried,” one triangle was “innocent” and the other was “blinded by rage.” Even in crude animation all but one observer saw a story of high drama.

The first rule in building effective narratives is simplicity. In 2000, the average attention span of an internet user was measured at twelve seconds. By 2015 it had shrunk to eight seconds. During the 2016 election Carnegie Mellon University researchers studied and ranked the complexity of the candidates language (using the Flesch-Kincaid score). They found that Trump’s vocabulary measured at the lowest level of all the candidates, comprehensible to someone with a fifth-grade education. This phenomenon is consistent with a larger historic pattern. Starting with George Washington’s first inaugural address, which was one of the most complex overall, American presidents communicated at a college level only when newspapers dominated mass communication. But each time a new technology took hold, complexity dropped. The authors write, “To put it another way: the more accessible the technology, the simpler a winning voice becomes. It may be Sad! But it is True!

The second rule of narrative is resonance. Nearly all effective narratives conform to what social scientists call “frames.” Frames are proud of specific languages and cultures that feel instantly and deeply familiar. To learn more about frames enter “frames” into the search block of the healthy memory blog.

The third and final rule of narrative is novelty. Just as narrative frames help build resonance, they also serve to make things predictable. However, too much predictability can be boring, especially in an age of microscopic attention spans and unlimited entertainment. Moreover, there seems to be no limit on the quality of narrative. Some messages far exceed the limits of credibility, yet they are believed and spread.

Additional guidelines are pull the heartstrings and feed the fury. Final guidance would be inundation: drown the web, run the world.

Growing Pains for a New Democracy

October 26, 2018

That new democracy is Bhutan and it’s wedged between India and China. Bhutan is famed for its stunning scenery and devotion to the principle of Gross National Happiness. There have been many previous Healthymemory blog posts on Gross National Happiness.

Bhutan had a rather unique path to democracy. Instead of voters rising up to fight for the right to elect their leaders, the country’s revered king, Jigme Singye Wangchuck, initiated the process of drafting a democratic constitution. This constitution has some atypical features. Buddhist monks, nuns and other clergy are not allowed to vote on the logic that they should remain outside politics. No campaigning is allowed after 6 p.m. Candidates found “defaming” their opponents or straying into certain sensitive topics—such as Bhutan’s oppressively close relationship with India—face fines or reprimands.

Sounds wonderful. So what could possibly go wrong? Dorji Penjore, of the Center for Bhutan, noted that the last survey of the nation in 2015, showed a decrease in two of the nine indicators used to measure Gross National Happiness—psychological well-being and community vitality.

Two reasons have been provided for these problems. Both of which should be familiar to those of us in the US. One problem is social media. Apparently, the election rules were violated over social media and became pretty ugly. The second was party politics.

These two problems are plaguing us in the US. Much has been written about social media, and efforts are being attempted to try to reign in that problem. The second problem, which is not mentioned as much as it should be, is party politics.

According to the US Constitution each of the three branches of government, executive, judicial, and legislative are to provide checks on each other. Unfortunately, all three branches are under the control of the same party. Rather than checking the executive branch, the legislative branch is not only protecting an ill-behaved executive branch, but it is also attacking standing government institutions such as the Department of Justice.

The US Constitution is regarded by many as being sacrosanct. Indeed, one of the qualifying beliefs many have for Supreme Court Justices is that they be Originalists, meaning that they interpret the Constitution as it was understood when it was written. Previous healthy memory blog posts have pointed out that the Constitution as written is both misogynistic and racist. Attempts have been made to eliminate or mitigate these problems, but the fact that party politics could corrupt the vigilance each branch of government was to have on the other was not anticipated.

HM remembers reading that there were founding fathers who feared party politics. HM’s memory informs him that two of these were George Washington and John Adams. It is hard to see how politics would operate without political parties. But there appears to be a need to either eliminate or to mitigate the effectiveness of political parties, or to modify the US Constitution to protect its vulnerability from political parties.

Part of this post was base on the article by Joanna Slatter, “In tiny Bhutan, known for its pursuit of happiness, democracy brings discontent” in the 19 October 2018 issue of the Washington Post.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2018. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Is the Electorate Becoming More Stupid?

June 7, 2017

One of the more interesting, and depressing, presentations during the 29th Annual Meeting of the Association for Psychological Science was Kayla Jordan’s presentation titled “Great Debating: The Influence of the 2016 Presidential Debates on Public Opinion.” She has software that measures the sophistication of English. The software does not measure content, but rather the sophistication in which the content is presented. She used this software to measure the sophistication of the presentations of the different candidates. In the Republican debates basically all the candidates, except one, had fairly sophisticated presentations. Not surprisingly, that low outlier was Donald Trump, who won the Republican primaries. In the debates in the national election, Hillary Clinton was head and shoulders above Donald Trump who won the election. So the likely answer to the question posed in the title is “yes,” and that Donald Trump knew how to pander to this stupidity.

Of course, hope springs eternal, so the initial thought was that this election was an anomaly resulting from peculiarities surrounding this election. To assess whether there was “Balm in Gilead” Dr. Jordan analyzed the speeches done in prior elections. She found a consistent pattern in that the candidates who scored lower in sophistication tended to win the election.

Dr. Jordan went further in analyzing the inaugural addresses of all the Presidents. She found that the most sophisticated inaugural address was George Washington’s, and there was a continuing downward trend thereafter. A colleague who read a draft of this post informed me that Washington’s inaugural address was written almost entirely by Hamilton. This point should be kept in mind when considering these data. Today’s presidents have ready access to speechwriters.

This finding is indeed curious. Both education and technology level have increased since Washington’s time. Many people were illiterate in Washington’s time and illiteracy was a serious problem in fielding an army for World War I. Of course, there is ample data indicating that voters are ill-informed on the issues and that many do not vote in their own interests. Perhaps higher education levels have led many to believe that they know more than they do. Perhaps increases in technology have diluted good messages and introduced lies and false news. Or perhaps, politicians are learning that simpler messages are more persuasive. Let us hope that Trump represents the degenerate case, and that matters will rebound in the future. Otherwise the answer to the title of this post is a resounding YES, and we can kiss off the future of our democracy.

Of course, Donald Trump did not win the popular vote; he won the abomination called the electoral college. It is interesting to read the ostensible justification of the electoral college, which apparently was to prevent someone unfit for the Presidency, like Donald Trump, to win a popular election. It is a tad ironic that many Americans vote only in Presidential elections. Yet, in Presidential elections, the odds are that their vote will not count. Citizens need to demand that all votes count and that there be one vote for each citizen.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.