Let's Go!

"Fired up! Ready to go! Fired up! Ready to go!"
     Chant at Obama rallies, 2012

A populist autocrat claims a mandate from the people to legitimize his open disregard of rules of process. 

He claims to be doing the people's will -- directly and immediately -- without the delays and complications of checks, balances, and alternative points of view. 

Mass protests in opposition to the populist autocrat demonstrate that there is no mandate. 

There is a second purpose of protest demonstrations. They energize the people who are protesting. People see others share their view. Enthusiasm inspires more enthusiasm. Hearts beat faster. They are part of something big. They are part of a crowd.

Peter Patch is a college classmate. He served as a marketing strategy consultant for Citibank and other clients for over three decades. He has taught business classes at New York colleges over the past two decades. Currently, he serves on national nonprofit boards supporting youth at risk at the I Have A Dream Foundation in New York, and community transition for returning offenders at Community Resources for Justice in Boston.

Patch

Guest Post by Peter Patch 

In 1970-71, I believed the Vietnam War was a mistake. I couldn’t make sense of it. Why would peasant rice farmers be better off because of the war?

The more personal question: What would I do about it? I got involved. I joined a sit-in at the Boston Army Base. We went to jail for three or four hours. The next morning, we went to court. We got a minor slap on the wrist. Even that record of "disorderly conduct" would disappear in a few months.

I went down to Washington to the White House, for the March Against Death. I needed to express what is true for me: too much death. No positive outcomes.

Now we face the biggest challenge to our American democracy in our lifetimes. This threat from President Trump is greater than the WWII threat from Hitler. Here’s the difference: Trump is attacking the pillars of our democracy directly. Trump undermines the rule of law. Trump doesn't attack our soldiers; he attacks our Constitution and our institutions of national security. 

With the firing of 17 inspectors general, Trump undermined institutional accountability in the federal agencies the IGs covered. Trump has no intention of being "accountable" in any practical or legal sense.

But there are small signs of bipartisan push back. Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Dick Durbin (D-IL) of the Senate Judiciary Committee sent a letter to Trump demanding to know the legal justification for firing the IGs.

Trump’s tariff war is the dumbest tariff war in history according to The Wall Street Journal.

With the pardoning and commutation of the convictions of 1,600 January 6 assailants -- including the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers -- Trump undermined the rule of law. In my career as a management consultant I visited thirty-odd countries around the world -- "developed" and "developing" countries in about equal numbers. My observation: There is no single factor that more clearly distinguishes developed and developing countries than respect for the rule of law.

The assault on the FBI has begun with the threatened firing of six senior officials. Those assigned to work on the January 6 investigation are being "placed on a list," with the clear implication that their jobs are at risk. This is a giant chilling effect on the agency – a message that Trump and his allies and any crimes they commit are "off limits" to investigate.

Now Trump's team has given almost all of 2.3 million federal employees a brief window to resign, and receive severance payments through most of the year. With no clear plan to target specific agencies and positions, the only discernible purpose is to create chaos and undermine morale.

What is a citizen to do?

Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), the House minority leader, has stated we need to fight Trump's agenda "in the legislature" and "in the streets." I agree. We are the leaders we have been looking for. Are we just going to sit on the bleachers as we watch our democracy go down in flames?

So when I learned about the nationwide demonstrations yesterday, I decided I had to show up. Not because my showing up would change any outcome, but because I needed to take a stand.

 

Photos from The Journal News, a Lower Hudson Valley newspaper

So Wednesday I went to the demonstration at the office of our classmate Chuck Schumer (D-NY), the Senate minority leader. I was there to support him, as a friend – and encourage him to do more and do it now. Today, I sent him a message: "I support you, 1000%" but added, "Chuck, Do More -- Now!"

I didn't change the world, but I did change myself. Taking action creates its own inertia. Today, I am even more committed to raising my voice and taking my stand. That demonstration – that one hour – changed how I felt about myself, and my engagement with the cause, the fight. 

I’m in it with Chuck and I’m in it with you – however you choose to join the battle. 

I'm "In It To Win It," no matter how long it takes.

Years? OK. The rest of our lives? OK.

All Good. Let's Go!!

[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog to your email gfo to: https://petersage.substack.com. Subscribe. Don't pay. The blog is free and always will be.]

The resistace awakens: 50501

Democrats had been oddly quiet.

A plurality of voters chose Trump. Democrats have been processing that in quiet despair.

The silence has ended.

Senate Democrats changed policies. Previously, Democrats were uncertain whether to work with Trump -- after all he won the election and Democrats respect elections -- or to be in full resistance to Trump in the Congress and the courts. Legislative resistance would mean that Senate Democrats would use every parliamentary device and Senate rule to slow down the process of filling out the Trump team and then passing new legislation. As Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell used that strategy four years ago after Biden's win. Trump's illegal executive orders changed the politics and the mood. Trump was implementing the Project 25 agenda after all, doing so by "flooding the zone" with so many proposals that the public could not focus on the merits of them. Senate Democrats agreed to stay in session through last night to use the full 30 hours permitted for Senate debate to slow the nomination of Russell Voight, a Project 2025 leader, to be the director of the Office of Management and Budget.

Meanwhile, Democratic voters across the country found new indignation and energy. Democrats organized a nationwide program under the banner "50501," representing 50 protests in 50 state capitals on one day. Additional protests took place in Washington, including this one at the Treasury Department.

Steven Law is a college classmate. He attended the protest in Hartford, Connecticut. Like several others from the class of 1971, he has been urging people to assemble in protest of Trump's executive orders. Steve has had seven professions including investment portfolio analyst, domestic abuse shelter counselor, and search engine marketing analyst. At Harvard, he was as a reporter for WHRB, the college radio station. He tells me he has not taken part in any public political action since 1978 in South Africa -- until now.

His report shows keen attention to whether the protest will be safe and orderly. That is wise. The George Floyd/Black Lives Matter protests in 2020 got hijacked by infiltrators in Portland and Seattle, and the message of those demonstrations got hijacked as well.

Steven Law

Guest Post by Steven Law                              

Here's my experience at the Connecticut state capitol in Hartford.  

I attended this event aware of a warning from Robert Hubbell's Substack newsletter. The protests were put together quickly. "Several readers and other commentators have issued cautions about attending marches organized under that group’s (50501) sponsorship, suggesting that the marches are not well organized, may not have permits, and may be infiltrated by right-wing agitators." The group was dedicated to peaceful and orderly protest, but there might be counterprotests and conflict.

So, of course today I joined the 50501 demonstration at the capitol in Hartford. I'm pleased to report that the participants respected the laws, even to the extent of keeping the sidewalk open for pedestrians crossing through the crowd, and that I saw no evidence of provocateurs. However, there were no police around or near the crowd, which I take to be a sign of lack of organization. There were no counter protestors that I could see. 

Both the signs and the chants brought out the same themes and they ranged from the righteous to the obscene. (signs) “My body, my choice”, “F*ck Trump”, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere", "No King Trump", and "Deny Delay Obstruct". (chants) “Trans rights are human rights”, "Lock him up", “What does democracy look like?” And response “This is what democracy looks like.” The most common chants, and many signs, expressed outrage about Elon Musk: "Musk, Treasury is not your ATM," and "Deport Elon." I heard chants, "Musk must go."

About 400 people were present between noon and 2:00 despite the cold and the stiff wind. The mood was upbeat, excited, and cordial. Whenever a passing car or truck driver sounded their horn for us or a driver waved or held up a fist, the crowd let out cheers. I saw two opposition cars go by, which we ignored. We mingled in groups, talking to each other about, well, there have been so many outrages that conversations ranged from the Supreme Court, to historical dictators, to immigration, to Musk stealing our personal data, to the likelihood that January 6 armed groups may attack with impunity. 

Here is the New England Public Media account.

[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog to your email gfo to: https://petersage.substack.com. Subscribe.  Don't pay. The blog is free and always will be.]

Congress isn't stopping Trump. But unpopularity will.

"Ambition must be made to counteract ambition."
          Alexander Hamilton or James Madison, Federalist #15

Americans disapprove of Congress. 

Congress has capitulated to the executive. 

The authors of the Constitution assumed people like Trump would come along. He is a popular, charismatic demagogue who claims authority because he directly represents the will of the people. The design of the Constitution was to stop one-person rule by such a person. The president would be subject to impeachment and the legal system. Congress alone had the sole power to make laws, the power of the purse, and the power to declare wars. The Senate had the power to approve treaties and to approve senior executive appointments. Congress has tools.

Congress has abdicated. Its members will not risk re-election by insisting on their obligation to share in governance. 

Donald Trump demands loyalty. We watched Iowa Senator Joni Ernst approve Pete Hegseth for Secretary of Defense and Louisiana Senator Bill Cassidy, a physician, approve RFK Junior as head of HHS. The didn't want to do it, but they caved. Former Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney is a cautionary tale for Republicans. No matter how popular and deeply connected an elected official is to a constituency, no one can withstand the one-two punch of Trump and unlimited money spent against them in a primary campaign.

The Murdoch-owned The Wall Street Journal is troubled by congressional abdication. 

Wall Street Journal

The Journal represents the business perspective in the GOP coalition. Businesses require the rule of law. Businesses fears erratic one-person rule by someone subject to off-stage influences. Supply-chain management requires predictability. Trump flouted the law in declaring a tariff under a pretext national emergency. (Congress isn't crying foul.) Trump announced that he would ignore a law passed by a bipartisan Congress that shut down TikTok. Billions of dollars are at stake. (Congress did not stop him.) Congress passed a law requiring the president give 30 days' notice before firing inspector generals. Trump fired 17 of them. (Congress is not protesting.)

Theoretically, there would be a bipartisan revolt against Trump. It isn't happening. Republican officeholders are going along.

The real check on Trump is not the law and the Constitution, and might not even be the courts. Democrats should not think they can stop Trump by arguing undemocratic process. Trump taught the public not to care, and GOP politicians don't dare assert themselves. However, Trump has a vulnerability: He wants to be popular. Trump will get away with doing popular things. This includes using the pretext of national emergencies to send the U.S. military to the southern border. Trump ignored the law to keep TikTok on American screens because that was popular. He will override anti-discrimination laws to ban trans-female athletes from competing in women's sports because it is popular. He will kill DEI programs and pronoun announcements because doing so is popular. 

Democrats need not waste breath and credibility by condemning Trump for popular acts. They should abandon the formula that "if Trump likes it, then it must be wrong." Trump is, indeed a grifting, narcissistic, misogynist xenophobe, but even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Instead, Democrats must focus on the unpopular things Trump does. Tariffs that make prices go up will be unpopular. Freezing spending to create a mess in the Medicaid system is unpopular. Taking over Gaza with an "ownership" position is unpopular already, and will become even more so if we get mired in an endless war of religion and revenge. Trump is already screwing up.

Trump entered office as the least-popular president in American history, and it is downhill from here for him. Democrats just need to be careful that they don't do things that make themselves even less popular than Trump.

[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog to your email gfo to: https://petersage.substack.com. Subscribe.  Don't pay. The blog is free and always will be.]

Canada targets American alcohol

While my vineyard sleeps, American wine becomes collateral damage in a trade war.

Yesterday at the farm. Five inches of snow, a big deal for us.

Canada's first targets for retaliation are the ones easiest to manage and easiest to see are coming from the USA. Alcohol, including both wine and distilled spirits, are sold in provincial liquor stores with clear labels showing their origins.

Immediately after Donald Trump's announcement of the 25 percent tariff, Canada's provincial governors announced they were pulling U.S. alcohol off the shelf and banning new sales.

Their intent was to focus attention on red states. Producers in those areas might bring pressure on Trump and MAGA representatives in Congress. This might be bad politically for MAGA politicians. It is an easy win for Canadian ones. They can wave their flag. Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario, said "There's never been a better time to choose an amazing Ontario-made or Canadian-made product."

Wine is caught in the crossfire. Kentucky, politically bright red, is the top-of-mind state for producing bourbons. lt is a $9 billion industry there, producing 23,000 jobs. But alcohol is a wide target. Bright blue California is America's largest producer of wine, producing about 82 percent of U.S. wine. Wine is a $55 billion industry in California, far eclipsing Kentucky's bourbon. The state of blue Washington is the number two state. New York and Oregon, both blue, are tied for number three. Wine states are collateral damage.

The provinces are banning new wholesale purchases, not destroying existing stocks. As of yesterday, liquor stores in Toronto had stocked shelves.

Photo by Canadian Sandford Borins, author of Sunday's guest post

Any grape sales that might come off my vineyard this fall are a miniscule bargaining chip and probably wholly irrelevant to the tariff war. I suspect Trump's tariff announcement has little to do with trade balances (which are nearly even with Canada, where wage costs are roughly similar to ours), or fentanyl (of which little comes through Canada), or illegal migration (of which Canada is a small portal.) The Canadian tariff is about political posturing and branding. Trump is showing he is the 600-pound gorilla in this forest, the big guy. He is showing Americans that he restores American greatness, because all he needs to do is beat on his chest and other creatures tremble and capitulate. Trump wins and America wins.

Possibly Trump is serious about using tariffs as a revenue source and a way to bring jobs back to America. Perhaps he wants a permanent 25% tariff. That is possible. He is selling it. He is telling Americans there will be pain, but it will be worth it. 

Or maybe the real end-game for Trump is credit for another burst of American expansion, doubling the size of the country on a map, especially one with a Mercator projection. Asked what he hoped Canada would do, Trump said, “What I’d like to see— Canada become our 51st state.” 

We don’t need them. As a state, it’s different. As a state it’s much different. And there are no tariffs. So I’d love to see that. Some people say that would be a long shot. If people wanted to play the game right, it would be 100 percent certain that they’d become a state. But a lot of people don’t like to play the game. Because they don’t have a threshold of pain.

He isn't seeking to seduce Canada. He is looking for a capitulation from it. Join us, or your miserable life will get even worse. Canadians read it as an insult, which is most certainly is. The current mood by Canada is to fight back, targeting anything with a label showing an American terroir. 

[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog to your email gfo to: https://petersage.substack.com. Subscribe.  Don't pay. The blog is free and always will be.]

Elon Musk, the swashbuckling hero

Oligarchy comes in a surprising direction.

I thought when oligarchy replaced representative democracy, it would come clandestinely. I had imagined interlocking directorships, gentlemen's agreements sealed with a nod, and Skull-and-Bones-style secret societies.

Quite the opposite. Oligarchy came in the form of willful bad-boy billionaires, today's version of the swashbuckling pirate hero.

NY Times photo of "billionaire row" at Trump inauguration 

National government has the same formal institutions as in prior years, but they operate differently now. Essentially infinite money overwhelms old-style Madisonian checks and balances. Trillion-dollar businesses flex their muscles openly and proudly. Trump doesn't hide their influence; he showcases it. Since it is done shamelessly, it must not be illegal or dangerous. Right? Besides, being a multibillionaire is so very cool.

College classmate Larry DiCara observes that Elon Musk is understood by many as heroic. That makes Musk and this current form of oligopoly more dangerous than ever. DiCara is an attorney and civic leader in Boston, and an astute observer and practitioner of politics. He was elected to the Boston City Council in his 20s, having negotiated the ethnic political divides in a city where the immigrant melting pot melts slowly and incompletely. He maintains a website, newsletter, and blog: https://www.larrydicara.com

Guest Post by Larry DiCara

Did Anyone Vote for Elon Musk?

Elon Musk is not president of the United States. He is ineligible because he was born in a foreign country. [I don’t see anybody trying to change that section of the Constitution, yet.] Nevertheless, Elon Musk appears to be acting as if he is president and using his vast fortune, perhaps the largest in the world, as well as his enormous electronic network – he has 200,000,000 followers (but then, he does own Twitter) to exercise his influence in a way that, in my opinion, has never been seen before in the history of the United States. He is also trying to influence elections in other countries! 

Over 60 years ago, Daniel Boorstin, a well-respected historian, wrote in The Image that business leaders had been replaced by television and movie stars as the most acknowledged people in America. I think it all stems from the eternal need to have heroes. I think the Greeks said, “Pity the country that has no heroes. No, pity the country that needs heroes.” They come and they go from decade to decade. Perhaps, today Musk is becoming the hero that many people need. If his rags-to-riches story is true, then is that not possible for everybody? 

Al Gore was a year or two ahead of me at Harvard and once told me that it is difficult to argue for higher tax rates for wealthy people since so many poor people envision one of their children or grandchildren becoming wealthy. America has often worshipped its richest citizens. 

As a lawyer, I question the conflicts of interest surrounding many officials of the Trump administration. I especially question Musk’s various activities, given that much of his fortune is derived from companies that have business relationships with the federal government. If he is a government employee, then there are laws governing his conduct; if he is not but he is influencing legislation, then he is a lobbyist and must register. I know, because I have registered, both with the U.S. House and U.S. Senate.

There is a myth, almost as old as the republic, honoring the self-made man. In truth, many of the great fortunes have been derived from companies having a relationship with government. Whether it be contractors paving roads on the state and local level, or those manufacturing arms for our national defense, these men and women and their firms have not risen completely on their own.

 

I also question anyone’s having such undue influence upon a president of the United States, or a governor or a mayor. I think it is unhealthy. I think it is un-American. I don’t think anybody voted for Elon Musk.

 

[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog to your email gfo to: https://petersage.substack.com. Subscribe.  Don't pay. The blog is free and always will be.]

A Canadian looks at the new U.S. tariffs

We awoke this Sunday morning to learn we are in a trade war.

Canada is not going to pay our taxes for us. They have already announced retaliation with a 25% tariff of their own.

College classmate Sandford Borins is Canadian. He is a professor of Public Management Emeritus at the University of Toronto, having retired in July 2020 after a 45-year academic career. He maintains his own website where he shares his thoughts on politics and life in Canada: https://sandfordborins.com  Here is his overnight reaction to the news.

Sandford Borins wearing the King Charles III Coronation Medal for public service, which he recently received

Guest Post by Sandford Borins

Emperor Donald I 

When Justin Trudeau had dinner with Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago last November, Trump asked what the impact of tariffs would be. Speaking as an ally and a friend, naively it now appears, Trudeau said they would have a severe impact on the Canadian economy. Since that dinner, Canadian governments have responded to Trump’s original complaint to justify tariffs, working assiduously to harden what was once called “the longest undefended border in the world” by putting in place Blackhawk helicopters, drones, and patrols. Since that dinner, Trump – showing himself to be no friend of Canada -- has been telling people that the leader of Canada admits that tariffs would greatly damage the Canadian economy. Yesterday, despite our work to respond to the complaint about the border, we got tariffs.

What are the Facts?

Not that facts matter to Donald Trump, but in broad strokes these are the facts. Very little of the fentanyl illegally entering the U.S. (approximately 1 percent) is coming from Canada and very few of the people entering the U.S. (approximately 1 percent) are coming across the Canada-U.S. border.

Canada and the U.S. have a two-way trading relationship of approximately 1 trillion dollars annually that, overall, is balanced. Canada exports more natural resources (oil, gas, minerals) and the U.S. exports more intellectual property (Hollywood films, streaming and network television, computer software). Manufacturing is essentially balanced (the tightly integrated automobile assembly industry). In Trump’s first term, Canada, the U.S., and Mexico renegotiated NAFTA, the worst trade deal in history according to Trump, renamed a slightly changed agreement "USMCA," and gave Trump a big win.

Shock and Awe

The first fourteen days of Trump’s second presidency have seen a flood of measures intended to shock and awe Trump’s perceived enemies, domestic and foreign. They have included attacks on political enemies; rule by executive order; the imposition of tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China; threats of tariffs against the E.U.; and threats of military action to seize strategic assets such as the Panama Canal and Greenland. Externally, Trump seems to be intending to convert alliances such as NATO into an American Empire, in which the U.S. uses economic and military threats to dominate.

The U.S.’s real adversaries – China and Russia – are undoubtedly looking for opportunities in this weakening of the western alliance. China will be offering closer economic co-operation, and Russia will be considering military action along its borders.

A History of Cooperation

Though Donald Trump ignores history, it is essential to recall the close history of military, cultural, and economic cooperation between the U.S. and Canada. We have fought side by side in every major war since World War I (though Canada did not participate in Vietnam and Iraq, two wars we regarded as overreach, a judgment borne out by history). Key moments in this history of cooperation include:

· Canadian assistance in bringing American hostages safely out of Iran after the Iranian revolution, celebrated  by the film Argo

· President Clinton’s expression of support for a strong united Canada on the eve of the 1995 Quebec referendum on sovereignty, a message noticed by Quebec voters

· Canada sheltering airline passengers diverted from U.S. airspace on 9-11, dramatized by the musical Come from Away

· Canadian assistance during the Los Angeles fires last month, including sending the only water bombers able to use seawater.

The Canadian Reaction

Donald Trump seems to think that because Canada’s prime minister’s popularity is low in the waning months of his mandate, Canada will collapse like a house of cards. My reading of public opinion here is very different. Canadians, while feeling betrayed by Trump, are united and determined. There is very strong public support for the tariffs that Canada announced last night. Public reaction, in effect boycotts of high-profile American goods, may intensify the impact of our tariffs. And we will be looking for trade and investment partnerships to increase our independence from the U.S.

The political scene in Canada is changing as I write. With the key political issue being the relationship with the U.S., Canadian voters are asking themselves which of the candidates to replace Trudeau as leader of the Liberal Party and, soon afterwards, which of the candidates in the general election, can best stand up to Trump.

The End Game

What is the end game of the trade wars that Trump is initiating with Canada, Mexico, China, and, coming soon, the E.U.? The U.S.’s allies are open to an honest and truthful discussion of ways to build a better alliance. Trump seems to be intent on building an American Empire, in which the U.S. dominates economically and seizes territory as it pleases. The U.S. will face economic resistance, as Canada and Mexico are demonstrating, and Europe will follow suit. There will be growing opposition to this costly imperial vision within the U.S. As a Canadian from birth and an optimist by nature. I will bet on the alliance.

 

[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog to your email gfo to: https://petersage.substack.com. Subscribe.  Don't pay. The blog is free and always will be.]

 

What systemic racism looks like

Trump:

"We do not know what led to this crash but we have some very strong opinions and ideas, and I think we’ll probably state those opinions now.”

Nothing triggers my Republican-oriented readers so much as my writing that racism exists in America and that Trump appeals to that racial animus.  

Republican frustration with me is not ameliorated by my saying Trump is very skilled at it. His racialized message puts him in sync with the American electorate. Democratic readers get frustrated with me, too, because my saying Trump understands American racism better than do Democrats is a criticism of Democrats. 

Democrats think Americans are better than we are -- or should be better. Trump takes Americans as so many are -- a little bit racist. Or more than a little.

I lived in Boston during the busing era, 1973-1975. Tribal thinking was rampant. The Irish -- and by that I mean the great-great grandchildren of mid-19th century Irish immigrants -- disliked their rivals, the Italians -- the grandchildren of early 20th century immigrants from Italy. Boston self-segregated into ethnic neighborhoods. People profiled each other: Irish, Italian, Polish, Jewish, Black, and Brahmin (the old New England gentry WASPS.) I was an outsider within this system, a visitor from Oregon, a noncombatant nobody.

Under the locals' veneer of equality and a pretense of respect for everyone as individuals, I saw widespread profiling, stereotyping, and prejudice. There were two big divides that cut across ethnicities. Christians were in a different tribe from Jews. Whites were in a different tribe from Blacks.

Trump is simultaneously cynical and toxic while being politically very effective. Trump appeals to tribal grievance with his attacks on diversity. Underlying this is his presumption that Black people are intellectually inferior. Therefore, attempts to recruit Black employees means that Whites are injured and that standards must have been lowered. The premise is that we cannot have both diversity and merit. A great many people are not offended or surprised by Trump's "common sense." It sounds about right to many people -- which is why he felt comfortable saying it and it was his top-of-mind thing to blame for the crash.

Reporter question: “You have today blamed the diversity elements but then told us that you weren’t sure that the controllers made any mistake. You then said perhaps the helicopter pilots were the ones who made the mistake.”

TRUMP: “It’s all under investigation.”

Q: “I understand that. That’s why I’m trying to figure out how you can come to the conclusion right now that diversity had something to do with this crash.”

TRUMP: “Because I have common sense. OK? And unfortunately, a lot of people don’t. We want brilliant people doing this. This is a major chess game at the highest level. When you have 60 planes coming in during a short period of time, and they’re all coming in different directions, and you’re dealing with very high-level computer, computer work and very complex computers.”

Trump is threading a needle and winning in both directions. When Democrats observe Trump's overt racism, Republicans call it Trump Derangement Syndrome. When Democrats observe --as I am now -- that he is appealing to widespread tribal prejudice, Trump calls it an attack on Americans. How dare Democrats say Americans are racist. (It's just that Blacks are too stupid to compete fairly and everyone knows it, so it is about merit, not race.) 

Trump is letting systemic racism work for him. He can both use it and deny it. He provides a pathway for fellow Americans to do the same. We aren't prejudiced against inferior tribes. It is just merit. It is just common sense.

Trump is getting praised for scrubbing American history of signs that the majority culture is prejudiced.  We can relax and feel good about ourselves. America is okay. We are okay. 

[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog to your email gfo to: https://petersage.substack.com. Subscribe.  Don't pay. The blog is free and always will be.]