Trump Dumps: Redacted Version

The following Trump dumps, or droppings, will be unredacted when the Epstein Files are released in their entirety, UNREDACTED. In the meantime, we should publish a list of the rich and influential males who ARE NOT IN THE EPSTEIN FILES. It's probably a smallish group. 

Breaking Things: TACO wins big! Gets Iran to open the Strait of Hormuz, which was open before he attacked Iran. Billions well spent. Oops, closed again. The Art of the Deal Guy will deliver a deal with Iran that is one for the ages, 5-12, and one for the moment, a brief moment. 

Trump is trying to recreate the US in his own image: cruel, dishonest, arrogant, ignorant, ugly, untrustworthy, amoral, and indecent. He has been succeeding up to now.

Trump to IRAN: The clock is ticking

IRAN TO TRUMP: For you, too, Donnie

Do not ask For Whom the Clock Ticks 

It Ticks for Thee: No man is an island

Trump says he could run for Israeli prime minister with '99% approval' 

Dear Don: The plane is ready to take you to Tel Aviv. You and Netanyahoo can diddle each other -- if he's OK with you replacing him. Maybe he'll let you be PM of GAZA.

'It looks bad': GOP congressman Don Bacon explains why Trump's party is turning on him. (Raw Story) It's been looking bad since Trump popped out of his mother's womb as Mary Anne's Baby.

Don't Worry! Trump is moving the tankers through the Straits of Hormuz with his MAGIC SHARPIE.

Ya Gotta admit that Trump has done what no other US president has done. He has made people sympathetic to Iran.

Trump says his attack on Iran is a "noble mission." Like Sir Galahad the Pure, he is on an "excursion," a quest for the Holy Grail. His Epstein Project is absurdist, a lot like the Monty Python film, but a XXX version. Shooting will continue during Trump's weekend excursion to Mar a Lardo to play golf.

How to win a war: Attack Iran with no plan beyond diverting people from your pedo “excursions.” Insult your allies and friendly countries. Hit them with high tariffs. Threaten some of them with invasion. When you have created a mess with your Epstein Files war, ask the above for help. When you have created a mess with your Epstein Files war, ask the above countries for help.

As he deteriorates mentally the "Real" DJ Trump is exposing himself more everyday as an incompetent sociopathic misogynistic racist and a not very good golfer with a gift for insulting and alienating almost everybody.

Trump declares that all thoroughfares in the US will be renamed Trump Street, Road, Avenue, Boulevard, Parkway, or whatever. Same for airports, schools, hospitals, parks, and cemeteries. Washington to be renamed Trumpoopolis. The USA will be renamed the UST, the United States of Trump. It will operate as part of Trump Enterprises International. The new country is expected to be financially bankrupt by 2026. It is already morally bankrupt.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER!

The US Political System: A View from the Confused UK>

I currently reside in the UK, but lived in the US for much of my life. Many Brits I know or have overheard in pubs find the US political system extremely confusing. Trump's attack on Iran has prompted new questions about it; notably his ability to start a war without the approval of the so-called representatives of the people: Congress. OK, I know Brits find other things American confusing, like baseball and American football, just as most Americans find cricket, rugby, and FIFA football confusing. As George Bernard Shaw put it, "The English and the Americans are two great peoples separated by a common language." 

Brits are expressing their confusion about US politics more often in the Trumpian Era, because Trump is in the UK news 24/7. Many of the Brits' comments since November 2024 relate to the question, How did the US "elect" such a despicable charlatan twice? What about learning from experience? Why can't they get rid of him? An American could reply, "Hey, UK voters made another charlatan, Boris Johnson, prime minister." That's true, but there is this difference: when enough people in the UK realized what a bloviating, bullshitting, devious narcissist Johnson was, they sent him packing. His own party did, in fact, responding to angry public opinion. In fact, the Tories got rid of four PMs in 14 years. The voters turned out a fifth in 2024. That's one advantage the parliamentary system has over the presidential system. Prime ministers serve at the pleasure of the party in power. The party in power can jettison their leader at any time, if they become sufficiently toxic to the voters. Presidents serve fixed terms. It is extremely difficult if not impossible to get rid of one before the next election, no matter how incompetent or vile.

The Conservatives (Tories) allowed their members to pick Johnson's successor. The members tend to be extreme in their views, and opt for candidates with extreme views -- and limited ability. That made Liz Truss the perfect choice. She managed to nearly destroy the UK economy in just a few weeks. Tory MPs could not get her out the door fast enough. 

Back to the UK view of US politics. The most common question after the 2016 election was, Why didn't Hilary Clinton get elected? She got 3 million more votes than Trump did. In order to answer that question, I had to try to explain role of the Electoral College in presidential elections. Despite its name, it has no connection with education, much less wisdom. Have you ever tried to explain the English Wars of the Roses to glassy-eyed, hungover undergraduates? I have. I don't recommend it. 

I have explained to astonished British listeners how the Founding Fathers created the Electoral College to prevent the US from becoming a democracy. I must add many Americans are also astonished to learn that the Founders were opposed to democracy. The Founders feared that the "people" would elect some nut who would threaten "property," including human property. The EC, you see, does not represent the "people." It represents the states, each of which has a certain number of "electoral" votes, based on their population.  

Three times in US history presidential candidates who lost the popular vote have become president, because they got a majority of electoral votes. The most recent time was in 2016, when the Electoral College assured the "election" of a nut who wants to restore slavery and admires Hitler. Trump still claims he won the popular vote in 2016, just as he continues to claim he won the 2020 election, not Biden.

Yes, the Founding Fathers wanted a republic but not a democracy. And they are not the same thing. A country can be a democratic republic. It can be an undemocratic republic. It can also be a democratic monarchy, like the UK and quite a few European countries. The monarchs in these countries have no real power. They are titular heads of state. 

Of course, all this was not enough to explain what enabled Trump's rise to power, or why he remains there despite his incompetent and criminal behavior. There were many more questions to answer.

If you enjoyed this post and would like to become a follower of my blog, click on the blue "FOLLOW" button on the right side of the first page. Below there you can also find my previous posts. Thanks!

What is to be Done? (to Save US Democracy)

If they wish to save democracy, the leadership of the Democratic Party must start actually leading, showing more (some?) courage and genuine outrage, and never compromising with authoritarians.

The Trump administration violates the law and constitution on a daily basis. The argument that as the minority party Democrats are helpless is bogus. The Republicans have never been helpless when in the minority. They have used every mechanism possible, fair and foul, to stop, slow down, amend, and derail Democratic measures. 

Democrats, at least the leaders and corporate Dems, have been too nice. They are playing by the rules of a game their opponents have changed beyond recognition. The old game is over. If the leaders of the Democrats can't lead, they should get out of the way. Only radical action can impede Trump. Democrats must stop cooperating with him and his henchpeople. Do not vote for any Republican measures that advance his authoritarian agenda.

To be worthy of their name, Democrats must join with other  democratically minded people and propose a measures designed to protect and advance democracy, as well as reverse the anti-democratic measures of recent years.

I have drawn up what I call the People's Charter for the USA. It derives its name from the democratic program drawn up in the UK in the 1830s. It had six points or demands. Five became law. My charter is longer but I believe American citizens should demand all of them.  

• 1.       Abolish the Electoral College, a thoroughly anti-democratic institution. People in other countries find the Electoral College bewildering and idiotic. Because it is.
• 
  
• 2.       Prohibit gerrymandering. Create an independent, non-partisan commission to draw up boundaries of congressional constituencies. This is done in other democratic countries.
• 
  
• 3.       Overturn the Citizens United decision of SCOTUS. It is responsible for hugely increasing the influence of big money in elections. Nothing like this exists in other democracies.
•  
• 4.       Prohibit political ads. They are virtually useless as information, misleading or untrue, insulting, and damned annoying. Prohibited in most democratic countries.
• 
  
• 5.       Introduce proportional representation or ranked voting to end the stranglehold of the corrupt two-party system. Some people will argue that this would make efficient government impossible. Ask yourself, is what we have now efficient? 
• 
  
• 6.     Make the Senate representative of the country. It gives the less populated states as a group more power than the highly populated states. California with 40 million people and Wyoming with only half a million have the same number of senators. This is grossly undemocratic.
• 
  
• 7.       Make voting simple, safe, and convenient. Voting is an obligation. It should not be a survival test, torture, or a danger. Eliminate voter suppression of all kinds. Other democratic countries do not try to limit the number of people who vote. They encourage voting. 
• 
  
• 8.      Fund public education adequately and fairly. Public college and university education should be free or cheap, as it was when I went to college and university in the late 60s and early 70s. Why are we short-changing our children and dumbing down our voters? 
• 
  
• 9.      Establish a national, affordable health care plan that covers everyone. The present for profit system is a disgrace and an international laughingstock. The system costs the US twice as much as in other developed nations, and the results are worse in terms of mortality and morbidity. Scores of millions are uncovered or inadequately covered. Health insurance must be affordable, universal, and disconnected from employment. The present system turns many workers into virtual serfs tied to their jobs.
• 
  
• 10.       Require the payment of a living (not minimum) wage for all adult workers. Why should workers have to have two or even three jobs to make ends meet?
• 
  
• 11.     Reduce the period between the election of the president and the inauguration to two or three weeks, preferably less. This would have minimized Trump's ability to create havoc after the "stolen election" of 2020. In the UK and many other countries, a new administration generally takes over immediately after the election. This can be done because the parties have already selected the members of the cabinet and other ministers.
• 
  
• 12.     Reform the judiciary. Judges should be selected by professional bodies, not by presidents and Congress. This includes the Supreme Court, whose bias towards Trump is flagrant and dangerous. Justices of the SCOTUS and all judges should serve fixed terms, not for life. They should operate according to a code of ethics established by an independent board of legal and political scholars. 

Effective, fair federal gun control is imperative. I did not include it under these reforms but it would follow if they were implemented. Not possible? Check out other democratic, developed countries. 

If you enjoyed this post and would like to become a follower of my blog, just click on the blue "FOLLOW" button on the right side of the first page. Below there you can also find my previous posts. Thanks!

American Exceptionalism, Part II

The US is truly exceptional. What other country could have produced a leader as exceptional as Trump, a man who combined the talents of a gangster, grifter, bully, bullshitter, liar, pedophile, rapist, racist, fascist, traitor.... and elected him to the highest office in the land -- not once but twice.

Under Trump.2, the US has become more exceptional than ever. His bellicose actions toward Canada, Mexico, Venezuela, Greenland, Iran, Cuba, and Nigeria are merely the latest examples of American Exceptionalism. 

"American Exceptionalism" derives from the argument that the USA is fundamentally different from other countries; that it is superior to them, "Number 1," "The Greatest Country in the World." The reality is reminiscent of Orwell's 1984.

American exceptions abound:

The only wealthy country without a system of universal health insurance coverage. Existing health insurance plans verge on robbery. Under Trump 2, millions have lost even the most minimal health coverage. 

A Department of Health and Human Services led by "Worm Brain" R.F. Kennedy Jr, doing its best to revive diseases previous generations had virtually eliminated and to bring us more epidemics and pandemics. Measles is the latest revived disease, thanks to anti-vaccine propaganda. You would almost think the Trump regime is trying to kill you.

A Department of Défense (War?) led by "Whiskey Pete" Hegseth that thinks indiscriminate killing of civilians around the world is "legal" and Christian. 

A Department of Homeland Security under "Who is it Today?" that spends most of its time terrorizing and killing the American people. Now adding airports to its mission in a bid to destroy the airlines by making flying increasingly dangerous. 

A Department of Justice under Pam "Hide the Epstein Files" Bondi, devoted to undermining existing laws, eroding human rights, and protecting pedophiles. 

A minimum wage far below the level of a "living wage."

A railway system far inferior to that of every other developed country. Poor public transit in much of the country.

A deteriorating public education system, which helps the GOP to repeatedly con illiterate voters. 

A government friendly to pedophiles and other sexual predators.

Number 1 in billionaires.

Number 1 in medical bankruptcies.

Number 1 in mass shootings.

Number 1 in Covid deaths.

The US is currently in the grip of Christo-capitalist fascism. Its evolution into this obscene system did not begin with Trump. It is the result of decades of far right brainwashing and the gradual erosion of constitutional and legal protections of political and human rights. 

Trump is a product, a symptom, of the current malignant version of American Exceptionalism. He did not create it. It will not go away when he does without radical reform of the political, economic, and cultural systems.

If you enjoyed this post and would like to become a follower of my blog, just click on the blue "FOLLOW" button on the right side of the first page. Below there you can also find my previous posts. Thanks!

Kings Fall Apart: Or, It's Not Always Good to be King, Mr Trump

TRUMP has been trying to make himself the first King of the USA since a revolting people gave George III the boot in 1776. Laying aside the argument that the Donald is a much worse leader than the last king, the King of Orange should think twice about being on a throne, however golden. George III, a Far Better Man Than Trump

The history of monarchy in the British Isles, which I know best, should not inspire a desire to play Macbeth and Don a crown. Few kings or queens have been able to enjoy their reigns, short or long. Only one British king has been called "The Merry Monarch," Charles II, and even he faced a sea of troubles, partly of his own making. 

Charles II did manage to last twenty-five years and die in bed with his crown on his head, a fate denied many other monarchs. The last Anglo-Saxon king, Harold, was killed in battle against the 1066 Norman Invasion led by Duke William of Normandy. Tradition holds that an arrow landed in Harold's eye. He had been king for only a few months. 

William I, Harold's Conqueror, did much better time-wise. But he had to deal with an Anglo-Saxon populace which did not welcome being ruled by a king who rewarded his French-speaking warriors with their lands. He dealt with the opposition by killing lots of peasants and destroying their homes. His corpulent body exploded when he was being forced into a too small tomb, emitting a foul smell and showering those nearby with unmentionables.

William II, the Conqueror's eldest son, had a nasty and short reign, cut short by an arrow again. On this occasion, the archer may have been an assassin hired by his brother Henry, who succeeded as king. Henry I he had a fairly lengthy reign. Legend has it that he died from eating a surfeit of lampreys. It is more probable that  a stroke killed him. Or maybe he died of worry about the succession.

Henry had no male successor, only a daughter, Matilda. He named her as his heir, but when he died, the alpha males among his barons decided they could not stomach being ruled by a woman, and chose his nephew Stephen as king. Those familiar with the US election of 2024, when Americans chose Trump over Kamala Harris, will understand. 

The result was nearly twenty years of fighting between the supporters of Stephen and those of Matilda. The Anarchy, as this period is called, was not a good time for anybody, except for some robber barons. Peasants, as always, paid a heavy price. 

In the end, the two sides reached a deal: Stephen would remain king, but on his death, the throne would pass to Matilda's son Henry of Anjou. When Henry II became king in 1154, he started a line of kings known as the Angevins or Plantagenets. Henry also inherited a large part of France, directly, or through his wife Eleanor of Aquitaine. He was always moving about to keep control his large and diverse territories. He faced many rebellions among his nobles and vassals. The rebels eventually included his sons and Eleanor. 

Two of his sons became king after him. Richard and John, of Ivanhoe and Robin Hood fame. That's all fantasy, but so is Richard's "Lion-Heart" reputation. He is the only king to have a statue outside of Parliament, for some unfathomable reason. Richard spent a mere six months of his ten year reign in England, and like Trump, treated the country like a cash cow. He massacred thousands of Muslims, Jews, and even Christians while Crusading for Christ in the oddly named Holy Land. He also died when struck by an arrow, while besieging a rebel castle. Gangrene set in, and that did for him.

Richard I had no children. Enter his brother John, the only English king of that name. Let's see why. (NB: This is not John)

End of Part I.

 

The New Declaration of Independence: From Trump

 

This year marks the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. The present  state of the USA demands a new declaration -- against Donald Trump and Trumpism. 

The original declaration of 1776 blamed George III for the conflict. Most of the blame lay with Parliament, but focusing on the king made the argument for independence simple: the people versus a tyrant. The argument is much stronger today than in 1776, because Trump, unlike George III, truly is a tyrant. Ironically, just recently, George III's descendent, Charles III schooled Congress on the importance of the ideals proclaimed in the declaration.   

Charles did not mention that the original Declaration of Independence, in the part few read today, listed a long series of "repeated injuries and usurpations" it ascribed to George III, designed to establish "an absolute Tyranny over these States." 

Today, a New Declaration of Independence from Trump should be drawn up, with a similar list of the injuries and usurpations he and his MAGA toadies have inflicted on the USA. I propose something like the following:

He has repeatedly violated the Constitution and corrupted the system of separation of powers and checks and balances.

He is destroying the fabric of American institutions designed to advance education, health, and the general welfare. 

He has attacked and is attacking freedom of speech, the press, and assembly. 

He has violated the norms of diplomacy and human rights, killing and arresting people without evidence of any crime. 

He has made enemies of traditional allies and friends of the USA.

He is destroying one of the strongest economies on earth.

He has repeatedly violated the norms of human morality.

He has brought the USA into global contempt.

He has praised and assisted the enemies of human freedom, decency, and democracy.

He is a felon guilty of bribery, rape, pedophilia, tax evasion, extortion, and other crimes. 

He is a six times bankrupt who has repeatedly failed to pay his creditors.

He golfs on the taxpayers' money while the country burns.

If you enjoyed this post and would like to become a follower of my blog, just click on the blue "FOLLOW" button on the right side of the first page. Below there you can also find my previous posts. Thanks!

Trump, Manifest Destiny, and the Epstein Files.

[Image: "American Progress" by John Gast, 1872]

The term "Manifest Destiny" describes the belief of many 19th century Americans that they were destined to rule the North American continent; that they had a "divine right" to dominate the lands between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. The idea, if not the term, was unabashedly imperialist but even today, many political commentators seem to shy away from calling US expansion "imperialist." Donald Trump is a firm believer in Manifest Destiny, even if he knows little if anything about its history.

The phrase "Manifest Destiny" came into use after 1845, when newspaper editor and expansionist advocate John O'Sullivan used it. The timing was not coincidental. The US was in the process of annexing Texas, which had gained independence from Mexico in 1836. The US would soon be at war with Mexico, a war that was driven by expansionist ambitions. 

The plunder included what are now the states of California, Arizona, and New Mexico, and parts of Nevada, Utah, and Colorado. Some expansionists, including Jane Cazneau, who used the term "manifest destiny" before O'Sullivan, advocated the annexation of the rest of Mexico. 

That never happened, mainly because Manifest Destiny was a thoroughly racist ideology. It envisioned an American empire made up of white Europeans (plus their African slaves). Mexico was inhabited by large numbers of Native Americans (AKA "Indians") and people of mixed race who could not be part of the divine American mission.

The same thinking operates today. Trump has never spoken of annexing Mexico, because it is full of the sort of "criminal" and "inferior" people he claims are threatening the US. He has, however, repeatedly spoken of a US annexation of Canada, a predominately European white country. 

Advocates of manifest destiny also viewed Canada as a an area ripe for US expansion. Some expansionists demanded that Great Britain cede all of the Northwest Oregon Territory up to the border of Alaska. |Their cry was "54-40 or Fight". War threatened in 1846 but was avoided when the two countries agreed to a border on the 49th parallel. The peaceful resolution was partly due to the fact that the US was about to embark on the war against Mexico. To fight the British Empire at the same time would have been foolhardy. Of course, no one consulted the Native Americans who lived in the region.

Although the term "Manifest Destiny" emerged during the 1840s, the idea was expressed much earlier in American history, indeed at the very birth of the nation. It was annunciated clearly by William Henry Drayton of South Carolina in 1776. In that year, Cherokee bands attacked European settlers encroaching on their lands in the upcountry of the Carolinas and Virginia. The war that followed ended in a crushing defeat for the Cherokee. Many of their towns were destroyed, and they lost much of their historic land.

Drayton, a fervent advocate of American independence, viewed the war as an opportunity. At the time, he was serving as the Chief Justice of the newly independent state South Carolina. Drayton proposed that the defeated Cherokee be "extirpated" as a nation, that their lands "become the property of the American public," and that captives "become the property of the taker."

Drayton declared that the new nation had a divine mission. God had chosen the "American Empire" as his tool to advance the cause of liberty. The Lord had previously chosen Britain for this mission, but the British government had violated divine intentions by "trying to enslave the American people." Like other "Patriot" slaveholders, Drayton failed to see the irony in his political rhetoric. 

In his role as Chief Justice, Drayton also recommended the suspension of due process. A state court charged fourteen "Tories" with treason and sentenced them to death. Their "crime" had been fighting with the Cherokee against the new independent states. Drayton commented that he would have hanged them without a trial, thus advocating what soon became known as "lynching." The sitting "President" of South Carolina, John Rutledge, pardoned them. 

During the War for Independence, partisans on both sides employed lynchings. Nowhere was it more common than the backcountry of South Carolina. Among those lynched were blacks who supported the British, something Rutledge did support. During the 19th and early 20th centuries, blacks became the main victims of lynchings. 

Drayton may not have used the term "manifest destiny" but his statements and actions show that the idea a divine mission was present from the infancy of the American Republic. The popularity of his ideas and methods was an unfortunate omen for the new nation. 

Like Trump, Drayton employed populist rhetoric to convey his ideas of a divine mission to the public. Trump may not use the term "manifest destiny" either, but he is echoing it when he says that Greenland and Canada should belong to the US. It is also noteworthy that Trump has not threatened to annex Mexico, because it is supposedly inhabited by the sort of "bad people," he has sworn to deport from the USA. 

That may change. In his latest buccaneering ventures, Trump has threatened to annex or destroy various countries, including Venezuela, Cuba, and Iran. His motive in these cases seems to be to distract people from his numerous appearances in the Epstein Files. But appealing to a "divine mission" of the USA helps him with his gullible base.

If you enjoyed this post and would like to become a follower of my blog, just click on the blue "FOLLOW" button on the right side of the first page. Below there you can also find my previous posts. Thanks! 

The US Constitution: A More Perfect Union?

"The Constitution in Danger!" is a cry we hear constantly now. The illegitimate fascist Trump regime violates the document on a daily basis. What is too often overlooked in the analysis of what is happening is the fact that the constitution itself contains weaknesses and loopholes that allowed a traitorous felon like Trump to become POTUS and act with utter disregard for the law. 

I grew up learning that the "Founding Fathers" were supremely wise; that they drew up a "more perfect" constitution for the new United States. Leaving aside the problem of the phrase "more perfect," how perfect was it? The rise of Trump exposed major imperfections. 

We should remember that the delegates to the Constitutional Convention were white men, mostly wealthy white men, many of whom owned other human beings, and that they created a constitution that reflected their time and interests. 

For too long people believed, or said, that the constitution would protect the US against such an outcome. Separation of powers, the courts, Congress -- all have failed to do what they were designed to do, prevent rule by an illegitimate and lawless president and administration. 

The 14th amendment of the 1860s should have prevented Trump from even running for president, for inciting the January 6 insurrection. Many people believed it would. I thought it might. Again, it proved useless because the courts and congress failed to act.

We can blame greed, corruption, bigotry, stupidity, treachery or fear, for the present mess, but those are things the constitution is supposed to guard against: human failings. But the constitution is a document. It relies on humans to uphold it. 

If the voters elect severely flawed officials, who appoint other severely flawed officials, the constitution will not be the protector of rights it is alleged to be. That is exactly where we are. 

"We can impeach the president!" many people cry. Impeachment has been tried twice in Trump's case, and failed both times. He is the first president to be impeached twice. No president has ever been removed through impeachment, only by the undertaker, resignation (Nixon)  or the end of their term. 

The constitution provides for impeachment in Article 2, Section 4. It can also be used to remove the vice-president, cabinet, and all high ranking civil officers as well, for treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanours. 

That sounds great, but Article 4, Section 2 requires impeachment by the House of Representatives and conviction by the Senate. The first is extremely hard to get, the second virtually impossible, especially if the president's party controls Congress or is even close to a majority. If an attempt to use impeachment to remove the Felonious Trump failed twice, what are the chances of impeaching and convicting the whole festering administration? The process could take years, and fail, s it almost always does.

The more recent 25th Amendment (1967) supposedly added another layer of protection against a crazy or incapacitated POTUS. But it relies on the Vice President and cabinet to implement it. Good luck with that. Even if by some miracle that bunch of criminal loonies did act, it would give us President Vance, which would not be an advance at all.

One of the goals of the constitution was to cement the union of the former colonies, now states. The new constitution was an improvement in that sense on the country's first constitution, the Articles of Confederation, drawn up during the War for Independence. 

The Articles gave the states too much power and the central government too little. But the improvements made by the new constitution didn't prevent the secession of eleven "Confederate States" in 1860-1861, leading to a bloody civil war.

The main reason for that tragedy was the failure of the Founding Fathers to solve the problem of slavery. Many of them were disturbed by the existence of slavery in a country that famously proclaimed human equality and liberty in its Declaration of Independence. But nearly half of the delegates "owned" human beings. They included George Washington and James Madison, who wrote the first drafts of the Constitution. 

The delegates, including anti-slavery delegates, nevertheless voted for the flawed document. Their failure to deal with the slave issue in 1787 reminds me of St. Augustine's oft-quoted prayer, "Lord, make me chaste, but not yet."

The framers did agree to end the African slave trade, but not until 1807. The horrors of the Middle Passage continued legally for twenty more years, and to some extent illegally afterwards. A fugitive "labor" clause required that the enslaved who escaped to another state must be returned their "rightful owners." 

The words "slave" and "slavery" were not used in the Constitution. The framers avoided them, believing that they would sully the document. What was there was sullying enough. 

The infamous 3/5ths clause allowed states to count the enslaved as 3/5ths of a person for purposes of representation, a concession that gave the southern states more representation in the House of Representatives and the Electoral College than they should have had if only whites were enumerated. Thus the legitimacy of slavery was enshrined into the Constitution and the spread of slavery into new states became a contentious issue until it ended in civil war.

Democracy was another thorny issue the makers of the Constitution had to confront. Contrary to claims that the Founding Fathers favored democracy, they tried to prevent it. Democracy, they believed, led to chaos, tyranny, and expropriation of the wealthy (people like themselves). 

The Constitution they designed contained several sections designed to minimize popular influence in politics. It provided that Senators be elected by state legislatures, and that presidents be elected by an "Electoral College" chosen by the same bodies. Voters chose the members of the House of Representatives, but who were the voters? 

All of the states placed various restrictions on voting such as poll taxes or literacy tests. Women were excluded from voting until 1919. The enslaved could technically vote after 1865, but after Reconstruction ended in 1877, they were generally prevented from exercising their voting rights for nearly a century, especially in Southern states.   

Many of the original anti-democratic provisions of 1787 have been reversed by amendments to the Constitution. But not entirely. All eligible voters can now vote for president. But it is not the popular vote that decides the winner. It's the undemocratic Electoral College of 1787. Twice in this young century the winner of the popular vote has failed to win the presidency.  

Senators are now elected by popular vote. But the Senate remains a fundamentally undemocratic body. The Constitution provided that each state could elect two senators. That was a concession to the smaller states, who feared being dominated by the larger ones if the Senate was based on population, as the House of Representatives was. Thus, we have the absurdity that Wyoming with a little over 500,000 people, and California with 40 million, both elect two senators.  

The House of Representatives is theoretically democratic, but the distribution of House seats is often skewed undemocratically by gerrymandering the borders of electoral districts. This is done by the parties who control the state legislatures. Republican attempts to purge certain voters from the voting rolls make things even worse. 

The opposition to the Trump presidency stresses its commitment to "Save Democracy." I fully support that. But we should acknowledge that we are working with an imperfect constitution, and its imperfections have paved the way for an aspiring fascist dictatorship. We should be calling for a movement to "Create a Real Democracy."  

In 1787 a member of the public allegedly asked delegate Ben Franklin what the framers had created. "A republic, if you can keep it," Franklin replied. Notably, Franklin did not say a "democracy." Today, we should be saying that our goal is "A democracy, if we can make it."

If you enjoyed this post and would like to become a follower of my blog, just click on the blue "FOLLOW" button on the right side of the first page. Below there you can also find my previous posts. Thanks!

Robert Burns and Women's Rights

The 25th of January is the birthday of Scottish poet Robert Burns (1759-1796). On the evening of that day, millions of his fans around the world gather for a "Burns' Supper" in his honor. After a meal of haggis, neeps, and tatties* they drink a toast of whisky to "The Bard" and listen to some of his poems. At midnight on January 1, much of the world sings "Auld Lang Syne," the song based on Burns' poem of that name. They pledge to "take a cup o' kindness yet, for auld lang syne!" 

Kindness appears in short supply around the world these days, and the supply is dwindling as rapidly as the number of eggs in Trump's USA. I wonder how many MAGAts sang those words about kindness this New Years with sincerity. 

But kindness, however crucial, is not my main theme here. It is human rights. Burns was a staunch defender of the rights of women as well as men. He wasn't always sensitive to that need. He was something of a womanizer, to put it bluntly. 

Before he became famous for his poetry, he had decided to take a job as an overseer and bookkeeper on a Jamaican sugar plantation, which was worked by enslaved Africans. He changed plans after his book of poetry was published to great acclaim in 1786. It is not clear if he ever denounced African slavery, at least directly. But he denounced injustice and inequality, notably in  "A Man's a Man for a' That."

For a few years after the publication of his book, Burns was the toast of Edinburgh, mingling with and lionized by Scotland's elite. That changed after the French Revolution began in 1789. Like many young men in Europe, he supported that revolution, and the earlier American one. The Scottish elite did not, and most of them distanced themselves from the radical Burns. He left Edinburgh and returned to farm near Dumfries, close to his birthplace. He married and became an exciseman (collector of customs duties), a government job that may have restrained his political radicalism. 

In 1792, Burns wrote "The Rights Of Women." The first stanza sets the tone:

While Europe's eye is fixed on mighty things,

The fate of empires and the fall of Kings;

While quacks of State must each produce his plan, 

And even children lisp the Rights of Man;

Amid this mighty fuss just let me mention,

The Rights of Woman merit some attention.

The poem was highly topical. Thomas Paine had just published The Rights of Man and Mary Wollstonecraft A Vindication of the Rights of Woman. These works alarmed and horrified the elites of Britain and much of Europe. By echoing their rhetoric in poetry, Burns marked himself as suspect in their eyes. 

The last stanza of the poem quoted approvingly a rallying cry of the French revolutionaries, "ca ira!" ("it will be fine") and seemed to place the "Majesty of Woman" above that of kings. 

By today's standards, Burns' list of women's rights may seem rather conservative. The rights he demanded were not political or even legal. They included protection, decorum (good manners), admiration and respect for women's opinions and influence. Good romantic that he was, Burns argued that the power of women lay in their ability to soften the harsher aspects of man's nature. 

All that may sound old-fashioned and anti-feminist, and certainly the sentiments were seized on by Victorian conservatives as an argument against women's suffrage and legal rights. But juxtapose Burns' praise of women to MAGAt statements and behavior toward women, and the difference is stark. Burns may have been something of a womanizer, but he never claimed things like "Your body, my choice." 

On this January 25, let's "take a cup of kindness" and have a wee dram in honor of "Rabbie" Burns, recently voted "The Greatest Scot." He narrowly beat out William Wallace, "Braveheart." 

*Neeps are turnips, tatties are potatoes.

PS. The first Burns Supper took place in Greenock, the town where I was born, on January 29th, 1801, which the organizers mistakenly though to be his birthday. It was later changed to the correct date of January 25th and has been held every year since on that day.

If you enjoyed this post and would like to become a follower of my blog, just click on the blue "FOLLOW" button on the right side of the first page. Below there you can also find my previous posts. Thanks!

Easter Special: The Resurrection of The Orange God

I'm looking forward to the 250th Anniversary of US independence, to see how the God-King Trump and the red MAGAts spin his fascistic policies while celebrating a revolution against alleged tyranny and for liberty, equality, and the pursuit of happiness. 

I'm wondering how they will deal with the irony of such a celebration led by a president who is a convicted felon, adjudicated rapist, pedophile, and insurrectionist. Can you imagine a Trump speech denouncing Benedict Arnold as a traitor? Arnold was a Boy Scout compared to Trump.

2024 was a leap year, and on November 5th, American voters took a leap into the abyss. A leap that is now producing AGONY for many of them, including his supporters. I mean, the price of eggs, FFS. 

IRONY, of course, is an enduring feature of the human condition, but the current world fairly drips with it. The world should be getting better, given our vast experience and knowledge, but it is getting worse.   

A presidential election in the USA is always a leap into The Twilight Zone, given the existence of the Electoral College and the massive fortunes spent on electing our political clowns. But this election outdid all the previous ones in its fantastically outrageous mockery of the democratic process, not to mention its sheer expense, lunacy and incompetence. 

When was the last time a convicted felon with scores of outstanding indictments against him ran for president? This snake oil salesman, father of 10,000 lies and nearly as many illicit affairs, sells bibles to the faithful to raise money for his campaign. The scenario drips with irony. Trump doesn't read and certainly doesn't heed the GOOD BOOK. He's broken virtually every commandment on a daily basis. 

"His" bibles are produced in China, a country he has repeatedly threatened and condemned. But they are cheap and profits are good. Never mind that a bible is a book you can get for free in the USA. Most churches give them away, or they did when I was an innocent kid.

Trump supporters swear that GOD sent him to save America from satanic "libtards and commies." Somehow, OUR godlike SAVIOR didn't manage to come up with a way to save a million or so Americans from the Covid pandemic. Bleach didn't work; or that horse medicine. The US, with 4% of the world population, racked up 20% of the deaths globally. How quickly we forget. 

To MAGAts, Donnie the Blessed is both savior and savvy, and most important, is opposed to gun control, their political litmus test. Trump agrees that guns are not the problem, people are. 

The solution appears to be eliminating people, because guns without people will not be a problem. With RFK, Jr. handling federal health services, that goal should be met before long.  

Another irony arises from the fact that Trump, a convicted criminal, ran against Kamala Harris, a successful former prosecutor. The felon should not have been able to run, but he won, which is all you need to know about the abject state of the USA as it heads into the 250th anniversary of its existence. 

P.S. Easter is a great time of year to test claims of Trump's divinity. Crucify him. If he comes back in three days, we will know he's the genuine article.

If you would like to become a follower of my blog, just click on the blue "FOLLOW" button on the right side of the first page. Below there you can also find my previous posts. Thanks!

 

    

America's Last King: A Far Better Man than Trump.

The July 4th holiday in the US always produces some reflections on America's last king, George III. Most of them celebrate the overthrow of a tyrant, allegedly a mad tyrant at that. 

In recent years, such denunciations of King George have often been expressed by Americans who desire to get rid of Trump. "We removed the tyrant King George in 1776 and we'll get rid of tyrant Trump as well." Bravo, but comparing Trump to George III is a distortion of history. It is like comparing a slightly tarnished pot to a completely blackened kettle.

Americans succeeded in booting out George III in 1776. They have failed twice to get rid of Trump. Why would a people who  rejected George III 250 years ago accept a virtual tyrant with powers George never had and did not try to get? 

Do the apparent majority of Americans feel comfortable going to bed with a president the Supreme Court has declared immune from prosecution for his acts? Charles I claimed similar powers in 17th century Britain. It cost him his head.

As a historian of Georgian Britain, I reject the claim that George III was a tyrant. In my opinion, the evidence shows that Trump is incomparably worse as a leader and a man than King George was. 

George III had flaws, but an urge to despotism was not one of them. He was sometimes obstinate but he was not a narcissistic sociopath. He remained faithful to Queen Charlotte, his wife of 60 years and mother of his 15 children, poor lady. Unlike most monarchs, he never took a mistress. Maybe it would have been better if he had.

George considered himself a constitutional monarch and took his job seriously. He venerated the (unwritten) British constitution. Unlike Trump, he understood his country's constitution. His father, Frederick, Prince of Wales, ensured he had a solid education in a wide array of subjects, including  politics and constitutional law. As early as age eight George could discuss current politics in speech and writing, in both English and German. He also learned French and Latin. He was the first British monarch to be thoroughly educated in science. 

As king, he was a strong supporter of the sciences and arts. He gave a large portion of his income to charity. He amassed a library of more than 65,000 volumes, and opened the collection to scholars including Samuel Johnson and Joseph Priestley. The collection is now part of the British Library and belongs to everyone.

Frederick, who died before his father George II, prepared his son George to be a "Patriot King," ruling in the interests of his people. Frederick believed, correctly, that the Hanoverian dynasty needed to improve its public image, and he passed that belief on to his son. 

The first two Hanoverian kings were highly unpopular. They preferred their native Hanover to England and spent long periods of time there. Many British people referred to both of them as "German George." 

In contrast, George III was born in Great Britain and considered himself British. At his coronation in 1761, he made much of the fact. "Born and educated in this country, I glory in the name of Britain." He made it clear that Britain and its prosperity would be his first concern. He spent his life of 82 years in the country. [Image: George as Prince of Wales, by Jean Etienne Liotard, 1754]

Initially, George III had little to do with the actions that angered the American colonists. They were devised by the king's ministers and approved by Parliament. The king opposed some of them, notably the Stamp Act of 1765. Part of that was personal. He detested the architect of the Stamp Act, Prime Minister George Grenville. 

In 1766, George was able to push Grenville out. His successor, Lord Rockingham, repealed the Stamp Act with the help of the king and the popular William Pitt. The king's efforts were applauded in the colonies. New York City erected a statue in his honor. 

In the following year, Parliament re-asserted its right to tax the American colonies. The furor the new taxes (Townshend Duties) produced led to all but a tiny tax on tea being repealed. Leaving the tea tax in place was intended to maintain the principle that Parliament could levy taxes on the colonies. (Image: George III by Johan Zoffany, 1771)

The king supported Parliament's right to tax the colonies. But it was Parliament's right, not his. After the Civil War of the 1640s, British monarchs could not levy taxes. That was Parliament's prerogative. 

The Declaration of Independence blames George III rather than Parliament for the conflict that followed, because it was simpler than explaining the bizarre intricacies of the British political system. The result was a distortion of reality that has become a standard meme of American history.

The Declaration listed 27 grievances against the British government. Most of them began with "He has...", personalizing the conflict into one of the people versus an overbearing king. It is worth noting that perhaps as many as half of the colonists were Loyalists who supported the king's government during the war. 

George III was no warmonger. One of his first actions as king had been to bring an end to the Seven Years' War with France and Spain at a time when Britain was winning victories everywhere. 

It is true that once the American war had begun, he was determined that it end in a British victory. He obstinately continued to support the war even after the disastrous British defeat at Yorktown (Oct. 1781), when most of his ministers urged him to give up. A few months later, he agreed and authorized peace negotiations.

Once independence was conceded he accepted, grudgingly, the new relationship with the former colonies. In 1785 he told John Adams, the first American ambassador to Britain, "I was the last to consent to the separation; but the separation having been made ... I have always said, as I say now, I would be the first to meet the friendship of the United States as an independent power." 

George III is often referred to as Mad King George, and people persist in connecting his loss of America to insanity. The problem with this view is that he showed no symptoms of mental illness before 1788, five years after American independence.  

British rule in the colonies was often insensitive and infuriating. The frustrations were increased by the immense distance between Britain and America. But no colonies of the time were as loosely governed by an imperial country as the thirteen who declared independence in 1776. They were also highly prosperous.

 

The timing of the revolution had more to do with the removal of the French threat from North America in 1763 than any actions of George III or the British government. Before then, the colonists felt the need for British protection. After then, they didn't. That emboldened them to push for change in the relationship between mother country and themselves. British actions exacerbated an already difficult situation.

The change to independent status made sense, but explaining it as the result of the tyranny of George III is misplaced. In 1785, an American Quaker, Hannah Griffits, provided an interesting perspective on the results of the revolution: 

The glorious fourth -- again appears 

A day of days -- and year of years 

The sum of sad disasters 

Where all the mighty gains we see 

With all their boasted liberty 

Is only change of masters. 

(Image: George III by Allan Ramsay, 1762)

Further Reading: 

John Brooke, King George III (London: Constable, 1972)

Stanley Ayling, George the Third (London, 1972)

Jeremy Black, America's Last King, George III (New Haven; Yale University Press, 2006)

Andrew Roberts, George III (London: Penguin Books, 2023)

 

Don't Just Dump Trump & His Gang: Reform the System that Made This Obscenity Possible

We must remove Trump from power. That is obvious. But that will not be enough to preserve America's Democracy. Unless the USA carries out major reforms of its political system, the danger from anti-democratic forces will remain high. 

WHY? Democracy in the US is not firmly rooted, and never has been. Trump has built on anti-democratic policies and machinations dating back decades or more, some to the very beginnings of the USA. Many of them exist at the state rather than federal level. A root and branch strategy is needed to eliminate these dangers. 

Many people will say the changes I suggest are impossible. And it will be a huge struggle to achieve any of them. But many people said that all men, and later all women, could never get the vote. Many people said slavery could never be eliminated. 

Britain was the greatest slave trading nation in history, but after grass roots campaigns, Parliament abolished slavery in the British colonies in 1833. The US required a bloody civil war in the 1860s to accomplish emancipation. The dust has never settled on that conflict or the racism that continues to motivate a large part of the population.  

I would like to see the people of the US engage in something like the Chartist Movement which emerged in Britain in the 1830s and 1840s. It took its name from "The People's Charter." 

Its aim was to establish a working democracy. Of its six demands, five became law by the early 20th century. The sixth, for annual elections to Parliament, is unlikely to ever be achieved because of its impracticality. Politics is constant enough.  

The Chartists did not include women in their vision of democracy but that demand surfaced almost immediately, and women got the vote in two stages, in 1918 and 1928. 

I have drawn up a badly needed People's Charter for the USA. Instead of six points it has twelve: 

• 1.       Abolish the Electoral College, an anti-democratic institution that has empowered American reactionaries since 1789. Replace it with the National Popular Vote. People in other countries find the Electoral College bewildering and idiotic, because it is.
• 
  
• 2.       Prohibit gerrymandering. Create an independent, non-partisan commission to draw up boundaries of congressional constituencies. This is done in other countries.
• 
  
• 3.       Overturn the obscene Citizens United decision of SCOTUS. It is responsible for hugely increasing the influence of big money in elections. Nothing like this exists in other democracies.
•  
• 4.       Prohibit political ads. They are virtually useless as information, misleading, insulting, and damned annoying. Prohibited in most democratic countries.
• 
  
• 5.       Introduce proportional representation or ranked voting to end the stranglehold of the corrupt two-party system. Some people will argue that this would make efficient government impossible. Ask yourself, is what have now efficient? 
• 
  
• 6.     Make the Senate representative of the country. It gives the less populated states collectively far more power than the most populated. California with 40 million people and Wyoming with only half a million have the same number of senators. This is both absurd and grossly undemocratic.
• 
  
• 7.       Make voting simple, safe, and convenient. Voting is an obligation. It should not be a survival test, torture, or a danger. Eliminate voter suppression of all kinds. Other countries do not do things this perverse way.
• 
  
• 8.      Fund public education adequately and fairly. Public college and university education should be free or cheap, as it was when I went to state universities in the late 60s and early 70s. Why are we short-changing our children and dumbing down our voters? You know why.
• 
  
• 9.      Establish a national, affordable health care plan that covers everyone. The present for profit system is a disgrace and an international laughingstock. The system costs the US twice as much as in other developed nations, and the results are worse in terms of mortality and morbidity. Scores of millions are uncovered or inadequately covered. Health insurance must be universal and separated from employment, which turns workers into virtual serfs.
• 
  
• 10.       Require the payment of a living (not minimum) wage for all adult workers. This should vary according to local living costs. It costs a lot more to live in California than in North Dakota. Why should workers have to have two or even three jobs to make ends meet?
• 
  
• 11.     Reduce the period between the election of the president and the inauguration to two or three weeks, preferably less. This would have minimized Trump's ability to create havoc after the "stolen election" of 2020. In the UK and many countries, a new government generally takes over immediately after the election. This can be done because the parties have already selected the members of the cabinet and other ministers. In the US the cabinet is not selected until after the election, and often contains unpleasant surprises. 
• 
  
• 12.     Reform the judiciary. Judges should be selected by professional bodies, not by presidents and Congress. This includes the Supreme Court, whose bias towards Trump is flagrant and dangerous. Justices of the SCOTUS and all judges should serve fixed terms, not for life. Ten years max. They should operate according to a code of ethics established by an independent board of legal and political scholars. The number of justices, currently nine, should be fixed in law at nine, or another number. They should not be the president's lapdogs.

Effective, fair gun control is imperative. Click on link to read what I have written on that. I did not include it under these reforms but it would follow if these other policies are implemented. 

If you enjoyed this post and would like to become a follower of my blog, just click on the blue "FOLLOW" button on the right side of the first page. Below there you can also find my previous pos