Connect with us

Americas

From Plato To Donald Trump: A Once Unimaginable Declension

An elder Plato walks alongside a younger Aristotle. "The School of Athens" is a fresco by the Italian Renaissance artist Raphael. It was painted between 1509 and 1511 as a part of Raphael's commission to decorate the rooms now known as the Stanze di Raffaello, in the Apostolic Palace in the Vatican.
Avatar photo

Published

on

“….till the class of philosophers be invested with the supreme authority in a state, such state and its citizens will find no deliverance from evil….”-Plato, The Republic

“I love the poorly educated.”-Donald J. Trump, 2016

It’s hardly a secret. During the once unimaginable Trump years – an ongoing era of conspicuous presidential dereliction and determined anti-reason[1] – Americans have been enduring  a grievous national retreat. Earlier, in  principle at least, and at a moment when “principle” still held certain tangible meanings,  Plato’s Republic had provided a proper benchmark for many generations of college students. Here, acquainted with a learning-based view already well-known to Thomas Jefferson and to other founders of the American Republic (back then, our leaders actually read challenging books), such students could think interestingly and usefully about a “philosopher king.”

 The lesson was “heavy,” of course, yet unambiguous. For earnest freshmen, this inspirational figure of  commendable judgment and public righteousness was cast asthe one who could be trusted, the exemplary political  leader, the witting thinkerwho could fuse real learning (not cheap merchandising, chicanery or electoral contrivance) with law-supporting national governance.[2]

Plato’s proposed leader represented what the interested scholars would call an “ideal-type,” and was not considered as an immediately graspable or pragmatic model for national political implementation. Nonetheless, it still served to remind entire societies that justice, virtue and decency could somehow be immensely practical. This dignifying message is patently absent from literally anywhere in the Trump White House. Correspondingly, with this Platonic example, higher education was regarded as an intrinsically worthwhile American experience, not just a tactical stepping stone to better vocation or higher personal income.

Back then, inter alia, American higher education was not just about learning how to extract narrowly personal benefits without regard for fulfilling certain much wider and necessary societal obligations.[3]

Back then, in essence, dignified learning was about rejecting the primal and persistently damaging ethos of “everyone for himself.”[4] In other words, worthwhile it itself, such learning was the literal opposite of what we now suffer hourly from a tweeting but non-reading American president.

 There is more. Now, at a precarious time when extant US presidential liabilities are being amplified and multiplied by worldwide disease pandemic,[5] by a bewildering and frightful pestilential assault, it is a last good time to inquire as follows: What has happened to this once enviable and hopeful model of political leadership?

Significantly, the day-to-day betrayal of this model by an American president and his unswervingly obsequious henchmen in government and industry also represents a wholesale betrayal of America’s Founding Fathers. Though assuredly not understood by Donald Trump or any of his reflexively servile enforcers, the Founders who crafted the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were animated by distinctly Platonic notions of wisdom and by the corollary high ideals of Natural Law.[6]  Thomas Jefferson, especially, had argued that the core viability of the precarious new American republic would depend most of all upon the meaningful education of its citizens. For Jefferson, the kind of ignorant imposture we must now tolerate in the Trump White House would have been judged irreconcilable with any genuine democracy.

Myriad promises notwithstanding,  Donald J. Trump could never plan to move us even inches toward a more properly virtuous and wise “polity.” Rather, and exactly as Plato had once feared in a generic sense, we Americans have already been deformed by a dissembling president who is unable and/or unwilling to distinguish between true knowledge and self-serving opinion. Much like the contemporary Sophists who Plato had recognized could only impair societal betterment and virtuous government, Donald J. Trump represents an utterly insidious caricature (one might even say here, a grotesque self-parody) of commendable national leadership.[7]

In this connection, the president now wittingly risks millions of American lives by personally taking over very complex medical and scientific judgments regarding Covid19.[8] When he is finally finished supplanting properly analytic assessments with his own propagandistic and conspiratorial views of the raging pestilence,[9] there will likely be more body bags piled up on our streets than were earlier evident during the Vietnam War.

That is a sobering and instructive image, one now well worth visualizing.

What about basic human compassion in the White House? As to any evidence of personal empathy or presidential concern for the millions of already suffering, ill and jobless fellow countrymen, Trump can only lament his own alleged punishments by the “fake news.” Grotesquely, even when confronted with the steadily mounting number of American fatalities to Covid19, his only thought is to urge “unfair” interlocutors to “be nice,” to be “more polite.”

There is more. Under Donald Trump’s sorely twisted presidential tutelage, we Americans can never expect any Platonic-style  “deliverance from evil.”  Rather, when we begin to consider the increasing threats of war and terrorism now tied up in various complex interactions with unpredictably virulent pathogens, such evil could prove greater than anything Plato might ever have imagined in the fourth century BCE. Looking toward these potentially existential  perils, they could eventually include enemy nuclear attack and/or biological terrorist assaults against the American homeland.[10]

If anyone in President Trump’s governing inner circle should ever come around to acknowledge such hazards, it would have to be done with a proper obeisance to Der Fuehrer; that is, obliquely, disingenuously, sotto voce.

Nothing more.

Ironically, in this pestilential age of rampant pandemic, a time of global war, terror and plague, the absence of a suitably wise American leadership could render vastly more probablethe weaponized pathogens of some present or future adversary. To wit, as Donald Trump rules openly and entirely by untruth and obfuscation –  “in his own flesh”[11] – he simultaneously undermines utterly vital US relations with Russia, China, India, Pakistan and North Korea.

“I love chaos,” volunteered  Donald Trump with uncharacteristic honesty on March 4, 2018. Portentously, there is ample confirming evidence of just such a dissembling love (a perverse sentiment he also applied several times to his personal relationship with North Korean dictator Kim Jung Un) in the offhanded way Trump has stubbornly mishandled American testing and tracing for the Corona virus. Moreover, in late May 2020, this president announced plans to withdraw from the long-stabilizing Open Skies Treaty with Russia, another worrisome example of favoring gratuitous international belligerence (chaos) over any correctly law-based patterns of international cooperation.[12]

Every four years, We the people – we ina nation which had once been nurtured by American Transcendentalist Ralph Waldo Emerson’s Platonic call for high thinking and by Henry David Thoreau’s complementary (and similarly Platonic) plea to “consider the way in which we spend our lives” –  push aside any still-recognizable  serious thought. Obediently, as a deformed society that loathes complexity and looks ever anxiously for simple explanations, we Americans may yet again reduce complex US policy issues  to a crass assortment of numbing clichés and empty witticisms. Whatever else one might say about the rapidly-approaching election, choosing an American president will once again be fraught with abundantly delusionary expectations, and with conspicuously uninformed or incoherent policy platforms.

 Endlessly, in our quadrennial presidential election contests, the celebrity politician draws huge audiences and generous donors in spite ofan ineffable absence of substance. Always, in our infantile and banal national politics, less intellect is more pragmatic. Now, with Donald Trump still able to be taken seriously by so  many Americans, less discernible intellectual substance still spells tangible candidate advantage. With this starkly benighted incumbent, outright buffoonery has often become indisputable electoral advantage.

Credo quia absurdum, said the ancient philosophers. “I believe because it is absurd.”

 There is more. The harshly demeaning and dangerous Trump presidency  bears witness to America’s unprecedented national decline  – a declension of both the electorate and the Republic for which it stands. Now, whenever the sitting president’s words seethe with altogether evident worthlessness, a still-adoring crowd rushes in from the wings to applaud. Mixing desperation with a curiously self-imposed absence of memory and learning, it nods approvingly, en masse, and in more-or-less compliant “social distancing,” cheerlessly celebrates what it presumptuously calls “American Exceptionalism.”  The celebrations are without authentic joy because any tangible evidence that America is “great again” would be preposterous prima facie.

If it were in any way identifiable, it would then represent a glaring contradiction in terms.              

Once, many of our national heroes, including those who could and would actually read, were created by something other than marketing and crude commerce.[13] Today, a “normally” incoherent American president has become an embarrassing pitchman, a circus-announcer fashioned by careful manipulation and persistently meticulous misrepresentations. Far more ominously, of course, America trusts this sitting president with life or death nuclear command decisions,[14] a complex set of expectations that is always subject not only to willful deviations, but also to wholly unpredictable episodes of decisional irrationality.[15]

Let us finally be candid. The American “emperor” is more than just occasionally mistaken. He is hideously and very plainly “naked.” Most worrisome, in this regard, especially for any still-remaining American national future, is an election process that will likely remain shabby and demeaning, that will gratuitously mock all elements of genuine learning, and that proves shamelessly refractory to all residual hints of American intelligence and virtue.

 In principle, somehow, this ill-fated election process can still be civilized and transformed, but only after critical personal meanings in America can finally be detached from a ubiquitously craven and vulgar commerce. The American Republic, it must then be acknowledged, represents significantly more than just another gaming or real estate deal fashioned by Babbitts and politicos who have never heard of Plato or Jefferson or Blackstone, and have no clue as to what is actually discoverable in the US Constitution. Soon, governing this democracy, it must be acknowledged, will require more than another blustering and self-promoting illiterate buffoon.

Much more.

 We must now finally be candid. Plato’s prescriptively high standard of political leadership remains unassailably out of America’s ordinary reach. Still, this guiding standard may serve to remind us just how far we have already managed to descend from the Republic’s original expectations and how far we will need to advance to fully rescue and restore the imperiled United States. No one can reasonably expect Donald Trump or even the other party’s presidential candidate to become another Thomas Jefferson, but we should still hold every presidential aspirant to some at least minimal standards of intellect, seriousness and learning.

Sustaining and expecting some rudimentary intellectual life in the United States is hardly a dispensable option. In the final analysis, a more far-reaching American respect for a genuine life of the mind is required not “merely” for national physical survival, but also for the most fragmentary implementations of virtue. In the seventeenth century, Blaise Pascal, in his eternally elucidating Pensées, effectively summarized Plato: “All our dignity, then, consists in thought. It is upon this that we must depend, not on space and time, which we would not in any case be able to fill. Let us labour then, to think well (emphasis added): this is the foundation of morality.”[16]

There is one last and prospectively overriding point left to make. It is that the manifold derelictions of an anti-intellectual American society must inevitably “spill over” into the wider global arena, sometimes “synergistically,”[17] and thus weaken this country’s overall position in world politics. Accordingly, it was modern French thinker and poet, Guillaume Apollinaire, who understood the corresponding bit of  wisdom better than most: “It must not be forgotten that it is perhaps more dangerous for a nation to allow itself to be conquered intellectually than by arms.”[18]

Now, beleaguered by plague as well as by the more “ordinary” hazards of foreign affairs – war, terrorism and genocide – Americans could do worse than consciously resurrect certain core principles of Plato’s Republic.

Far worse.

So long as we wittingly ensconce Plato’s “supreme authority” in the hands of a manifestly unfit American president, we should rightfully expect no quarter from adversaries of  any kind or magnitude, no reassuringly Platonic “deliverance from evil.”

None at all.


[1] “There is something inside all of us,” writes twentieth century German philosopher Karl Jaspers, “that yearns not for reason, but for mystery – not for penetrating clear thought but for the whisperings of the irrational….” See: Reason and Anti-Reason in Our Time, Archon Books, 1971, p.67.

[2]Generally, the pertinent obligations of international law are also obligations of US law. In the words of Mr. Justice Gray, delivering the judgment of the US Supreme Court in Paquete Habana (1900): “International law is part of our law, and must be ascertained and administered by the courts of justice of appropriate jurisdiction….” (175 U.S. 677(1900)) See also: Opinion in Tel-Oren vs. Libyan Arab Republic (726 F. 2d 774 (1984)).Moreover, the specific incorporation of treaty law into US municipal law is expressly codified at Art. 6 of the US

Constitution, the so-called “Supremacy Clause.”

[3] See, by this author, at The Daily Princetonian : https://www.dailyprincetonian.com/article/2018/06/a-core-challenge-of-higher-education

[4] Says French Jesuit philosopher Pierre Teilhard de Chardin in The Phenomenon of Man: “The egocentric ideal of a future reserved for those who have managed to attain egoistically the  extremity of `everyone for himself’ is false and against nature.” Nonetheless, at the international level, Trump has amplified the competitive nature of America’s Covid19 policies, a brand of “vaccine nationalism” that is the reductio ad absurdum of his more generally belligerent stance in world politics.

[5] Says Albert Camus in The Plague (1947): “At the beginning of the pestilence and when it ends, there’s always a propensity for rhetoric….It is only in the thick of a calamity that one gets hardened to the truth, to silence.”

[6] See Edward S. Corwin, THE “HIGHER LAW” BACKGROUND OF AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (1955);  Alexander P. D’Entreves, NATURAL LAW: AN INTRODUCTION TO LEGAL PHILOSOPHY (1951). Additionally, Blackstone’s COMMENTARIES recognize that all law “results from those principles of natural justice, in which all the learned of every nation agree….”  See William Blackstone,  COMMENTARIES ON THE LAWS OF ENGLAND,  adapted by Robert Malcolm Kerr  (Boston; Beacon Press,  1962),  Book IV,  “Of Public Wrongs,”  p. 62  (Chapter V.,  “Of Offenses Against the Law of Nations.”) Still earlier, a century before Demosthenes, Antigone’s appeal against Creon’s order to the “unwritten and steadfast customs of the Gods” had evidenced the inferiority of human rule-making to a Higher Law.  Here, in the drama by Sophocles, Creon represents the Greek tyrant who disturbs the ancient harmony of the city state.  Aristotle, in his RHETORIC, quotes from Sophocles’ ANTIGONE when he argues that “an unjust law is not a law.”  See RHETORIC 1, 15,  1375, a 27 et seq.

[7] In just one example, during his May 21, 2020 tour of a Ford plant in Michigan, Trump refused to wear a mask. Though his explanation for this legal violation was that he didn’t want to give the press “the satisfaction” of seeing him in a mask (what that should actually mean is anyone’s guess), more likely he thought that wearing a mask would project an image of weakness, and – as everyone must already know – Der Fuehrer  is not subject to the normal rules of biology and infection (just as he is allegedly immune to any normal expectations of law). In essence, Trump’s refusal implies that he stands all-powerful, conspicuously “above biology,” just as he allegedly stands uniquely and brazenly “above the law.”

[8] “I tested very positively,” Trump said confusedly on the South Lawn of the White House on May 21, 2020,. “So this morning, yeah, I tested positively toward negative, right? So no, I tested perfectly this morning. Meaning, meaning I tested negative. But that’s a way of saying it, positively toward the negative.” To be charitable about describing such telling presidential confusions, Trump has also had some “trouble” in the past offering proper terminology concerning his medical test results.

[9] https://www.yahoo.com/news/answers-va-given-hydroxychloroquine-1-220636232.html

See also: https://www.yahoo.com/news/massive-study-coronavirus-patients-shows-140100072.html

[10] Professor Beres is the author of some of the earliest books on nuclear war and nuclear terrorism, including Terrorism and Global Security: The Nuclear Threat (1979); Apocalypse: Nuclear Catastrophe in World Politics (1980); and Surviving Amid Chaos: Israel’s Nuclear Strategy (2016). His pertinent writings on this topic have been published in The New York Times; The Atlantic; Special Warfare (Pentagon); Modern War Institute (West Point); The War Room (Pentagon); Parameters: Journal of the US Army War College (Pentagon) International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence; and The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

[11] “The mass man has no attention to spare for reasoning,” warns 20th century Spanish philosopher Jose Ortega y’ Gassett in The Revolt of the Masses (1930), “he learns only in his own flesh.”

[12] Trump’s proposed withdrawal from the Open Skies Treaty (1992/2002) mirrored the U.S. decision to pull out of the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty with Russia in August 2019.

[13] Sigmund Freud maintained a general antipathy to all things American. He most strenuously objected, according to Bruno Bettelheim, to this country’s “shallow optimism” and its seemingly corollary commitment to a disturbingly crude form of materialism. America, thought Freud, was very evidently “lacking in soul.” See: Bruno Bettelheim, Freud and Man’s Soul (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1983), especially Chapter X.

[14] See, by Professor Beres, at The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, https://thebulletin.org/2016/08/what-if-you-dont-trust-the-judgment-of-the-president-whose-finger-is-over-the-nuclear-button/

[15] Expressions of decisional irrationality in world affairs could take assorted and overlapping forms, and need not be a function of “madness.” These forms include a disorderly or inconsistent value system; computational errors in calculation; an incapacity to communicate efficiently; random or haphazard influences in the making or transmittal of particular decisions; and the internal dissonance generated by any structure of collective decision-making (i.e., assemblies of pertinent individuals who lack identical value systems and/or whose organizational arrangements impact their willing capacity to act as a single or unitary national decision maker).

[16] This is taken from Chapter XXIII of Pascal’s Pensées, “Grandeur de l’Homme.”

[17] Synergistic intersections are those that are “force-multiplying;” more precisely, ones wherein the “whole” is effectively greater than the more-or-less calculable arithmetic sum of its “parts.”

[18] See Guillaume Apollinaire’s “The New Spirit and the Poets,” 1917.

LOUIS RENÉ BERES (Ph.D., Princeton, 1971) is Emeritus Professor of International Law at Purdue. His twelfth and most recent book is Surviving Amid Chaos: Israel's Nuclear Strategy (2016) (2nd ed., 2018) https://paw.princeton.edu/new-books/surviving-amid-chaos-israel%E2%80%99s-nuclear-strategy Some of his principal strategic writings have appeared in Harvard National Security Journal (Harvard Law School); International Security (Harvard University); Yale Global Online (Yale University); Oxford University Press (Oxford University); Oxford Yearbook of International Law (Oxford University Press); Parameters: Journal of the US Army War College (Pentagon); Special Warfare (Pentagon); Modern War Institute (Pentagon); The War Room (Pentagon); World Politics (Princeton); INSS (The Institute for National Security Studies)(Tel Aviv); Israel Defense (Tel Aviv); BESA Perspectives (Israel); International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence; The Atlantic; The New York Times and the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

Continue Reading
Comments

Americas

What democrats and republicans expect from U.S. foreign policy

Avatar photo

Published

on

Partisanship colors Democrats’ and Republicans’ foreign policy priorities in ways that will matter substantially for companies, global supply chains and financial markets under a divided Congress. This is demonstrated by the results of a public opinion poll conducted by Morning Consult’s U.S. Foreign Policy Tracker.

Among voters’ top five concerns, Democrats tend to prioritize outward-looking issues, including ‘climate change’ and ‘preventing global pandemics’ and ‘economic crises’, while Republicans’ attention is inwardly focused on ‘immigration’ and ‘drug trafficking’, as well as ‘securing U.S. supply chains’.

The largest partisan gap in public attitudes is on climate change. Among 14 major foreign policy challenges facing the U.S. government, the issue ranks first on Democrats’ list of priorities and 13th among Republicans.

There is also substantial polarization on ‘immigration policy’, ‘human rights’ and ‘managing relations’ with both Russia (upweighted by Democrats) and China (upweighted by Republicans).

A divided Congress will see gridlock over many of these issues.

More Republican voters than not (46%) and a near plurality of Democrats (32%) want ‘greater isolationism in U.S. foreign policy’, marked by ‘limited American engagement overseas’ and ‘greater closure to global trade and capital flows’.

Voters’ top five foreign policy issues are also noteworthy for what they leave out: ‘major geopolitical challenges confronting the United States’, including ‘Russia’s invasion of Ukraine’, ‘U.S.-China relations’ and ‘the Iran nuclear deal’.

Republican voters rank both China and Iran policy more highly than Democrats, and by wide margins: The former place them in seventh and eighth place by share, compared with 13th and 14th for Democrats. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, meanwhile, ranks sixth among Democrats and 10th among Republicans.

Its placement in the latter group’s ranking suggests that efforts to resolve the war and provide further economic and military aid to Ukraine risk being deprioritized, in line with recent media reporting.

Per the figure below, near majorities of Republican voters (48%) support decreasing U.S. involvement in other countries’ affairs and reducing foreign aid provision, substantially outpacing the shares who prefer the status quo. Democrats, by contrast, are nearly evenly split as to whether they would prefer the U.S. government decrease its involvement in other countries’ affairs or maintain the status quo.

Democrats’ and Republicans’ preferences are somewhat more closely aligned when it comes to their attitudes on ‘America’s military activities overseas’. A substantial plurality of Republicans (41%) would prefer that U.S. foreign policy involve more limited deployment of U.S. troops, and would like ‘to reduce American participation in military conflicts beyond the country’s borders’. For Democrats, the margins are slimmer on both fronts at present.

Voters’ attitudes toward ‘U.S. involvement in international organizations like the United Nations’ exhibit the sharpest polarization. Per the figure below, a near majority of Democrats (49%) support ‘greater involvement’, while a plurality of Republicans (34%) favor ‘decreased engagement’, though the share of Republicans who prefer to maintain present levels of engagement is close behind.

(Categorization derives from a survey conducted among a representative sample of 2,005 registered voters, with an unweighted margin of error of +/-2 percentage points).

International Affairs

Continue Reading

Americas

Gun violence: human rights situation in the United States is very dismal

Avatar photo

Published

on

The United States is known as the world’s largest democratic or full democracy country. From this introduction, the question may arise whether the United States considers it its ‘right’ to inform other countries of the world about disappearances, murders or human rights violations. However, according to various reports, the human rights situation in the United States is getting worse day by day. The incidence of gun violence, murder, police torture is increasing. The justice system is dying in the “vocal” country to protect global human rights, which is what the US citizens themselves are worried about.

In the middle of this year, the State Council Information Office of China published a report on the human rights situation of the United States in 2021. According to the report, the human rights situation in the United States has worsened compared to previous years. Millions of people have died in the country due to the government’s failure to control the corona epidemic due to political instability. At the same time, gun violence casualties have multiplied. “False democracy” tramples on the political rights of the American people, and aggressive behavior by law enforcement agencies makes life difficult for immigrants and refugees in the United States.

Also, of concern is the country’s growing discrimination against ethnic minority groups, particularly people of Asian descent. According to many analysts, the US administration’s unilateral actions have created new humanitarian crises around the world.

Statistics on gun violence deaths

According to recently released statistics from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 2020 saw the highest number of gun-related deaths in 2020 than any other year. This includes a record number of shooting deaths as well as gun suicides.

Analyzing data collected from various sources including CDC, FBI, US-based public opinion polling and research institute Pew Research Center says, in recent years, the complete data related to gun attacks in the United States is available in 2020. That year, 45 thousand 222 people lost their lives in such incidents in the country.

For years, there have been more gun suicides in the United States than gun deaths, the CDC says. In 2020, 54 percent of gun-related deaths in the country were suicides (24,292), while 43 percent were homicides (19,384). In addition, there were 535 “unintentional” gun deaths that year, 611 law enforcement-involved deaths, and more than 400 “unspecified circumstances” deaths.

A total of 45,222 people died in gun-related incidents in 2020, which is 14 percent more than the year before, 25 percent more than five years ago and 43 percent more than a decade ago.

In the United States, gun violence has taken a toll in recent years. It killed 19,384 people in 2020, which is the highest since 1968. That year, gun deaths were up 34 percent from 2019, 49 percent from five years ago, and 75 percent from 10 years ago.

Comparative Analysis of Gun Violence

The rate of gun violence in the United States is much higher than in other countries, especially developed countries. Although a 2018 study by the University of Washington’s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation of 195 countries and territories says that the United States ranks above the United States in terms of such violence, several countries in Latin America.

The study cited 2016 as the most recent year for gun violence statistics. According to the research report, the death rate from gun violence was 10.6 percent per 100,000 people in the United States that year. Whereas in Canada this rate is 2.1 percent per 1 lakh, in Australia 1.0 percent, in France 2.7 percent, in Germany 0.9 percent and in Spain 0.6 percent.

But the rate of violence is higher than in the United States in countries such as El Salvador, Venezuela, Guatemala, Colombia and Honduras. Overall, the United States ranked 20th in the world for gun violence deaths in 2016.

What is the annual death toll in mass shootings in the United States?

It is difficult to give a definite answer to this question. Because there is no single definition of ‘mass gun attack’ or ‘mass shooting’. Its definition can vary depending on various aspects, including the number of casualties and the circumstances of the attack.

According to the US Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, or FBI, a mass shooting or mass shooting occurs when one or more individuals are actively involved in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area. According to this definition, 38 people (excluding attackers) were killed in such incidents in 2020.

The US Gun Violence Archive (an online database of gun violence incidents) defines a mass shooting as an incident in which four or more people are shot, even if no one is killed (except the gunman). By this definition, 513 people were killed by gun violence in 2020. But however, defined, mass shootings in the United States kill more people each year than all gun violence combined nationwide.

Police ‘hiding’

According to various monitoring organizations, more than two hundred people died in the United States in the first five months of this year. As the general public panics over a spate of gun attacks, new questions have been raised about the role of the US police.

According to a report by the US media Washington Post, since 2015, an average of 1,000 people has been killed by police in the United States every year. Since 2015, The Washington Post has started collecting data on every shooting incident involving police officers on duty in the United States.

Earlier in 2014, after an unarmed black man named Michael Brown was killed by the police in Ferguson, USA, an investigation came out that half of the shootings or torture by the country’s police were not reported.

A Washington Post analysis of more than five years of media coverage, social media posts and police reports found that the number and circumstances of fatal shootings and overall victimization rates remained relatively unchanged during that period. Last year i.e. in 2021 also 1 thousand 49 people were killed by police firing.

According to the Washington Post, an average of 1,000 people dies each year in gun attacks or similar incidents across the United States. The same number of people were killed in police firing. Although half of those killed in police shootings are white, blacks account for the majority of victims as a percentage of the population. About 13 percent of the total population of the United States is black. Also, more than 95 percent of those killed by the police are men, between the ages of 20 and 40.

Racism

It is 2:30 PM local time on May 14 of this year. A supermarket in Buffalo, the second largest and black-dominated city in New York, was suddenly shaken by the sound of gunfire. An 18-year-old started shooting indiscriminately with a semi-automatic assault rifle. The attack was carried out in military uniform with body armor. The youth was also using a camera to broadcast his bloody rampage live online. Describing the aftermath of the attack, a local police officer said that day that it was like walking through the set of a ‘horror movie’. But it was all real. It was a battlefield.

13 people were shot in that attack in Buffalo. 10 of them died. Police later said 11 of the 13 people shot were black. The FBI described the attack as an incident of “violent extremism”. Agent in charge of the FBI’s Buffalo office, Stephen Belangia, told the BBC it was being investigated as a ‘hate crime’ and racially motivated violent extremism.

Immediately after this attack, the local police arrested the suspected gunman named Peyton S. Gendron. He was charged with ‘first-degree’ murder. Then the investigation revealed more sensational information. It is learned that the young man had posted a 180-page ‘manifesto’ online in support of white-supremacist beliefs. He also described immigrants and black people as “substitutes” for white people in hateful writings. And through this, the issue of racism in the United States comes to a new discussion.

The idea that whites are being ‘replaced’ by blacks has recently moved from far-right political ideology in the US to mainstream Republican Party politics. And many US media personalities are helping to popularize this ideology, which is seamlessly being further influenced by the rhetoric of the Republican Party.

The young man who attacked Buffalo tried to justify his demonic attack by promoting the ideology that white people in the United States are being weakened by immigrants. And his manifesto was full of racist words about black Americans.

The Buffalo attacker claimed to be inspired by the killing of 51 worshipers by attacking two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand in 2019. His claim is similar to the incident. Christchurch attacker Brenton Tarrant was using the camera to broadcast the attack live online. He also published his own manifesto before the attack.

But the Buffalo attackers were more influenced by homegrown discontent than they were by the Christchurch massacre.

According to the U.S. Gun Violence Archive, there were nearly 200 shootings or gun attacks in the country from January to May. In addition, according to a recently published report, between 2019 and 2020, the death rate of gun attacks in the United States has increased by about 35 percent overall.

But the Buffalo massacre stands out not only because of the number of victims, but also because of the political nature of the attack. Analysts say the incident must be seen in the context of the growing normalization of racism and political violence in the United States.

According to information from US-based independent media outlet Education Week, 17 US states have recently signed laws banning or tightening ‘critical race theory’ or racism and sexuality education, and 12 more states are considering similar legislation. Apart from this, discussions are going on about removing some books that may spread racist attitudes.

But these collective efforts have also created a mockery of the history of American racism and xenophobia. Discussions of America’s racial history have turned the spotlight on the country’s existing poverty, unemployment, and social deprivation.

According to many social scientists, centuries of neglect, neglect, and lack of opportunity have driven a large portion of blacks in the United States to violence. As a result, many white people in the country feel unsafe. And hate is born from that insecurity.

Gun violence is on the rise in the United States. According to various local media, more than two hundred people have lost their lives in gun attacks in the country until May of this year. In this situation, lawmakers and experts demand reform of the private arms control law.

They say gun violence has emerged as a serious social problem in the United States that cannot be stopped. Strict legislation and enforcement are needed for this. Instead of giving advice or advice to others, the US administration should focus on resolving the crisis in its own country first.

Continue Reading

Americas

Democrats Control of the Senate

Avatar photo

Published

on

Midterm elections are held in the United States every four years in the middle of the term of the American President, that is, two years after the presidential elections, in order to elect all members of the House of Representatives (435 members) and a third of the members of the Senate. These elections are an indication and a referendum on the performance of the American President in the first two years of his presidency.

During the elections that took place on November 8, 35 senators were elected who spent 6 years in office, in addition to 36 governors out of the 50 state governors who spent 4 years in office, 36 state governors and 27 state secretaries from a total of 50 states, besides the election of a large number of the local legislative positions, including the election of 6279 deputies out of 7383 deputies in the state legislative assemblies.

The midterm elections this year took place in an unprecedented atmosphere at various levels, as it was the first elections after the Covid-19 pandemic, which led to the death of more than a million Americans, and infected 100 million, and it is also considered the first elections to be held after supporters of former President Donald Trump stormed the Congressional Building in January 2021 to prevent the official announcement of President Joe Biden’s victory, and they are known as “Elections Deniers”.

The Senate elections – in particular- are considered a political battle by all standards, in which Catherine Cortez Masto’s uneasy victory in the State of Nevada came as a lifeline for the Democratic Party, and the failure of Republicans’ plans to take control of Congress. This battle was resolved in favor of the Democratic Party in the Senate.

The US Vice President Kamala Harris – who, by virtue of her position, presides over the Senate – has the relative weight, as she broke the tie rule and tipped the balance in favor of the Democrats, who seized seat No. 50 after announcing Masto’s victory in the aforementioned seat, while the Republicans remained at seat No. 49 in the Senate which is the upper chamber of the Congress, comprises of 100 seats.

The elections also have witnessed the defeat of a quarter of the candidates supported by Donald Trump, in which some of them instigated and participated in storming the Congress. The setback was the failure of the sweep expectations as expected by Trump and the Republicans, and even Republican lawmakers, and other commentators admitted that the Republicans had failed to achieve what is known as the Red Wave sweep, in reference to the States that support the Republican Party, which are known as the red States.

Many opinion polls had indicated that the Republican Party is expected to achieve a great successes in these elections, especially in light of the inflation and high prices crisis that the American citizens suffer from, which resulted in a significant decline in the popularity of President Joe Biden in recent months.

It can be asserted that a simple majority in the Senate will give the Democratic Party the ability to approve the judges chosen by US President Joe Biden to fill positions in the district courts, circuit courts and supreme courts, and this in turn will be a fundamental step for the Democrats to win new seats on the Supreme Court that now enjoys a majority of six to three Republicans. In addition, by controlling the Senate, the Democrats can reject legislations sent by the House of Representatives, which is controlled by the Republicans, and this is a remarkable success for the Democratic Party.

The majority in the Senate also means for President Joe Biden the ability to move easily with regard to international treaties, and the negotiations that will take place with the Republicans on a broader spending package at the end of the year, an issue that will need the approval of both parties.

A number of Democratic senators will seek to raise the debt ceiling, while House Republicans will seek to use this issue as a pressure card to obtain spending cuts. However, Democrats have the ability to raise the borrowing ceiling before Congress takes the oath, if the party members remain united.

The Democrats’ control by a small majority of the Senate is considered a miscarriage of Republican plans to conduct investigations into the activities of the Biden administration and his son Hunter, who had business dealings with Ukraine and China. The Democrats will maintain control over committees and investigations, in addition to preventing any attempts by the Republicans to isolate President Joe Biden, and on top of that, Democrats can pass a limited number of controversial bills with a simple majority of votes.

It is certain that this victory will have positive repercussions for the Democratic Party and President Biden during the next two years, that is, until 2024, when new elections for Congress will be held in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, in addition to the presidency.

It was expected, before the elections, that the Democratic party would lose 25 or 30 seats in the House of Representatives, and the party would turn into a clear minority in the Senate. This result would have been seen as a public rejection of President Biden, which would increase the pressure on him in his quest to run for a second term. But in turn, and after this victory, President Biden’s position within his party has been strengthened, and his advisors are now speaking with greater confidence about his intention to run for a second term, but this definitely depends on the performance of the Biden administration at the internal and external levels, the American citizens’ feeling with an improvement in their economic conditions, and the continuation of making progress in a number of issues, foremost of which is the issue of health insurance.

On the other side, there are concerns that a divided Congress, by nature, may lead to a state of legislative stalemate, and the Republican control of the House of Representatives will be enough to eliminate any hopes for President Biden to pass a comprehensive legislative agenda over the next two years.

Nevertheless, and despite the disagreement, there is a consensus between the Republican and Democratic parties over a number of files including confrontation with China, the promotion of international trade, and the acceleration of establishing energy projects.

The elections showed the lack of centralization of external issues and the focus on internal issues, including issues of protecting democracy and freedom of abortion, which is what the Democratic Party bet on and succeeded in.  In addition, the performance of the Democrats reinforced confidence in President Biden’s agenda and his presence at home and on the international stage.  In contrast, the failure of many pro-Trump candidates to win the elections is a painful blow to his movement, which puts Trump’s political future at stake, especially in light of his announcement to run for the upcoming 2024 presidential elections.

The elections were also evidence of the American citizen’s awareness and support for democracy despite the economic conditions, international instability, and the Biden administration’s preoccupation with several international files.

What happened in the elections was a victory for American democracy and emphasis on its strength, its ability to overcome challenges, and a correction for the compass of the American political system, which was distorted by Trump.

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Reports1 hour ago

Azerbaijan Can Accelerate Its Green Economic Transformation

A report launch and policy dialogue organized by the World Bank jointly with the Republic of Azerbaijan National Coordination Council...

Reports3 hours ago

Digitalization Advances Financial Inclusion for Women and Micro Business Owners but More Is Needed

The World Economic Forum launched today the ASEAN Digital Generation Report 2022, the sixth edition of the report since 2017....

Health & Wellness4 hours ago

Breast cancer: an aggressive variant triggers a hunt for cures

By Vittoria D’alessio Breast cancer is the most common type in women and, in Europe alone, causes almost 92 000 deaths a...

Americas6 hours ago

What democrats and republicans expect from U.S. foreign policy

Partisanship colors Democrats’ and Republicans’ foreign policy priorities in ways that will matter substantially for companies, global supply chains and...

Americas8 hours ago

Gun violence: human rights situation in the United States is very dismal

The United States is known as the world’s largest democratic or full democracy country. From this introduction, the question may...

Russia10 hours ago

Russia-Ukraine’s Winter’s War

More than 10 months have passed since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on February 24th, and the conflict is still ongoing....

South Asia12 hours ago

It’s all about India’s odd but subtle tit-for-tat perception

India has been known as an actor in world politics that had always chosen to refrain from any comment or...

Trending