Death to the Heroes

Born shortly after WWII, I am a ‘boomer’. A product of the post war baby boom when thousands of men returned home and thousands more women left the workforce to make room for the returning veterans - and return to a more ‘normal’ family life.  

It was a different time, with women being raised and educated in a way that supported the popular culture of the day. Then, being called a ‘housewife’ was a declaration of success wherein the breadwinner was able to afford supporting a home, a wife, and several children in a manner to which society approved.

It was the beginning of an era fueled by an economic boom like nothing before - and treating Black, Hispanic, and Gay populations with ignorance and segregation – even distain.

Thankfully times are changing.

Those days also gave rise to great innovations in medical care, and it was to be the spark that made the boomer era even more formidable.

One of the key contributors to the raise of global life expectancy over the last 250 years was the development of vaccinations. 

As seen in the table to the right, Oceana (Australia) and Europe were the first to experience a systemic increase in life expectancy. 

Life expectancy in Europe and the Americas started their increase in the mid 1800s - 80 years before underdeveloped areas. I believe it's not a coincidence that, in 1815, Sweden was the first nation to introduce compulsory Smallpox vaccinations to Europe. In 1853 this mandate spread to England and their colonel empire (Oceania & the Americas).

Only tuberculosis (TB) was a greater killer than smallpox in the 18^th & 19^th century. It was estimated that TB killed ¼ of the population of Europe in the 1800s. While an effective treatment (streptomycin) and a suitable vaccine (BCG) were developed, the biggest impact on TB was improved hygiene and the waring of masks in hospitals. But I digress. This post is not about TB.

Over the course of time in the 19^th and 20^th centuries many diseases were all but eradicated by vaccine. From polio to diphtheria and measles, vaccines – back in my day – were a no-brainer. Parents eagerly sought to get their children vaccinated as soon as their doctor would permit. Childhood deaths from many of these horrific diseases were all but eradicated. When I was born, children could be expected to live until age 55 - maybe 60. Today I’m expected to live to nearly 80. Likely longer.

I’m not proposing that vaccinations, in and of themselves, are the primary cause of increased life span. But they do mark milestones in the improvements in medical care and disease prevention. 

Some early vaccines were anything but safe and effective however. If they had 50% efficiency, they were considered good enough. Historically, vaccines were designed using a weakened form of the disease it was meant to combat. Some of the first cases of ‘inoculation’ were seen in ancient China where smallpox scabs from an infected person were scrapped off and pulverized to a powder. The powder was then inhaled by a healthy person to build immunity. It ‘appeared’ to work about half the time. You can imagine what happened to the other half.

Later in Europe, another practice used the blood of a person that survived the disease to create a serum for injecting into a healthy individual. It was also used as a treatment for the infected as well. This practice proved to have some of most effective outcomes. But it was a ‘hit-and-miss’ method that required many trial runs and often years of measurements to prove what dosage was going to prevent disease as opposed to causing it.  

Then, to reduce the hit & miss outcomes, laboratories began growing the virus or pathogen in the lab. There they could manage the strength of the disease strain and test on animals before moving to humans. But the process to bring a vaccine to market was still measured in years.

By the mid 20th century vaccines were the norm. Then in 1987 a grad student at the Salk Institute named Robert Malone mixed strands of messenger RNA (aka mRNA - a genetic element like DNA found in all humans) with droplets of fat. The reaction saw human cells creating proteins based on the mRNA / fat mixture. And customized proteins are the holy grail of human immune response.

The issues, however, were many. At the time mRNA was not easy to extract. At least not in any quantity. It was the early days of medical DNA/RNA research, and it was painstakingly slow and expensive. I’m not going to go over all the technicalities and gymnastics involved. But if you are intrigued by the genetics research behind the mRNA vaccines, please read The Tangled History of mRNA Vaccines published in Nature magazine.

From my perspective the BIG difference with the mRNA approach is that they are not ‘infecting’ the recipient with the virus that causes the disease. They are imitating the ‘protein’ the virus produces to create a ‘package’ of immune information that is delivered to your cells using mRNA. There, it is replicated using your natural immune response to create protein anti-bodies to the virus.

When Covid19 hit, the mRNA research spanned nearly 40 years of study and refinement. The anti-vaxers often suggest these vaccines ‘popped up’ on the spur of the moment and can’t be trusted as a result. Nothing could be further from the truth. If anything, we were just lucky that the maturity of the science and the onset of Covid19 occurred at the same time. 

The speed at which the mRNA vaccines were brought to market are a testament to the scientists, their long struggle and the U.S. Government’s focus on a solution. These vaccines effectiveness, now demonstrated with hundreds of millions of doses administered - and precipitous drops in fatalities among the vaccinated - make it one of the miracles of modern medicine and science.

Today – in step with the erosion of integrity in politics – there is an erosion in the integrity of people. Now, vaccination is more a political football than an obvious course of action. As I write this over 25% of Americans are refusing to get vaccinated due to ‘personal liberty’ objections. 

And for those that claim mandatory vaccination is illegal - it is not. As a matter of fact, compulsory vaccination laws were upheld in the 1905 landmark case Jacobson v. Massachusetts by the Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme Court ruled that laws could require vaccination to protect the public from dangerous communicable diseases.

More surprising to me is that those individuals charged with the public trust are some of the most adamant objectors. Those that are sworn to serve, protect and do no harm, are doing anything but.

From police to hospital staff and EMTs, not being vaccinated is a clear and present danger to themselves and others. Sworn to protect and heal, you would think these people, of all people, would know that this decision is not about THEM. They will contract and spread this virus to anyone and everyone in the name of personal liberty?  Really?

Well, I say MY personal liberty is more important than theirs. I have a RIGHT to be safe – they do not have a RIGHT to endanger me, my family or loved ones. When your personal liberty endangers me & mine – it’s personal all right. Very personal.

Many of those I once regarded as heroes are now the spawn of zombie-like Trumpism. It’s like you are dead inside. America needs you to WAKE UP!

JB

The Experiment May Be Failing

The Great American Experiment in democracy was first labeled such by George Washington in an address on January 9^th, 1790:

"The establishment of our new Government seemed to be the last great experiment for promoting human happiness."

Ever since that time, American leaders and scholars have been referring to the Great Experiment to warn the American people: This democracy we hold dear is not yet, and may never be, without danger of complete collapse.

Throughout our two hundred forty six year history, only the Civil War was a greater danger to our republic than the nationalism and autocratic lure that surfaced during the Trump presidency.

I do not blame Trump for being Trump. As a mater of fact, some of his rhetoric is what many of us heard from family and friends at the annual Thanksgiving roundtable. In some ways, his lack of decorum and diplomacy was, somehow, refreshing - at first. 

But his abandonment of political correctness was not, as it turned out, the full measure of the man. Trump’s true nature was one of self-indulgent illusions of grandeur. Falsehoods, and an eerie attraction to dictatorial autocratic leaders, raised flags early. His autocratic role models played a part in his constant denials, coercion, and purges of those that spoke truth to power.

But Trump is not the bad guy here. It’s the Experiment that has failed us. The Experiment assumes the American system of government is run by patriots and servants of the people. It has checks and balances to protect the Experiment from any lone-wolf dictator that would subvert the rule of law and the republican institutions that make this Experiment work.

The deep allegiance to power that Trump fostered in his brief time in office has provided a primer on how to subvert the Experiment and introduce autocratic rule in an astonishingly short time. Trump was not exceptionally intelligent. The next person may be far more capable..

Trump surrounded himself with people smarter than him that he could manipulate. In short order he had loyalists in key roles in government administration and the judiciary. His popularity and ignorance combined to pull in factions in conspiracy theories and para-military militias. He elevated hate groups, Nazi organizations, and special interests that could buy his favor for an ever decreasing price.

The last vestige of the checks and balances lay with congress; and there he excelled. Using his nationalistic rhetoric and lies he could weld the power of his right-wing base as no one since Regan. His endorsement meant a politician could sustain their power and prestige. Opposition was a political death sentence for any right-wing incumbent. Nearly every right-wing politician pledged allegiance. They pledged not to America, as their oath demanded, but to an autocratic leader and a political party that was being built in his false image.

Thus, in November 2020, when the last true power behind the Experiment (We the People) could speak, he was voted out of office. The candidate that ousted him was not remarkable in any way. He was an aged lifelong politician. Lacked charisma. Nothing unique about his platform or agenda. But then the people were not voting for him. They were voting against what Trump had wrought.

Trump had thoroughly expected to win in a landslide. Just as he convinced himself that he was always right, even when lying, he convinced himself that any loss would be due to subversion. The primal fear of any dictator: A coup.

Trump rallied his pledges to get his power back. Power striped of him by massive fraud and deception. He called on everyone he had placed in office – from governors to judges and congress. He rallied his hate base and convinced them he had their back if they could overturn the election and reinstate him to power.

They actually tried.

Today, nearly a year after that election, his control over the right-wing establishment has weakened only slightly. Few right-wing politicians will admit Trump lost the election when asked. States still spend millions on lawsuits, audits, and other trickery to overturn – but it’s far too late. And nearly every state dominated by the Republican party has passed new laws in 2021 to insure more 'right minded' people can vote.

So, it sounds on the surface, that the Experiment did not let us down. We the People won out. Right?

Wrong. It should have never gotten to an election. And our nation is significantly weaker as a result. His fitness to hold the office was in question from the first year. Yet congress did nothing as they were ruled by party politics rather than their oath of office. If the Experiment had worked as it should, we never would have had the insurrection that followed.

It is clear to me now that Trump was intent on a second term because his complete transformation of the rule of law, the Republican party, and our checks and balances was not complete. He fully intended to ask congress to pass legislation that would allow him to be president for life. He just needed four more years.

Two key provisions in our government have made this type of takeover (from the right or the left) not only possible, but now I fear, probable, if we do nothing. They are both rooted in the lack of term limits.

Congress: Ridding the republic of incumbency is the ONLY answer to preventing political and special interest coercion. A SINGLE eight to ten year term (with provisions for recall) for any congressional seat - House or Senate - will suppress the need to abandon the oath of office for an oath of interest.

Supreme Court: A SINGLE twelve to eighteen year term of overlapping service that insures at least one justice is appointed to the court in each four year presidential term. And these appointments cannot be blocked by parliamentary means.

Single term congressional seats will result in several meaningful changes:

• More independent candidates: Without the ability to offer lifelong power and influence, political party endorsements will be less of an advantage. Often special interests today back parties & PACS. But with their influence on elections diminished, such interests would be open to supporting more independent candidates and popular viewpoints.
• More qualified candidates:  If serving in congress did not have a lifelong allure, we would see more retired veterans, collage graduates and business leaders willing to take 10 years to serve. They could still return to successful private lives and businesses when they leave congressional service. No more posturing for the next election. Once they were in office, their constituency would have more power than any party or interest.
• Much better governance: Case in Point: In 2019 the President attempted to subvert funds from FEMA to build a wall. Twelve republican senators voted with all democrats to block the move. Only those republican senators up for reelection during the Presidents term voted otherwise. Far from a coincidence, it serves as glaring proof of the coercion inherent in incumbency.

The role of parliamentary procedure in weakening the Experiment:

• The fact that a single person or president can appoint multiple Supreme Court Justices to serve for LIFE does not reflect the diversity of judicial integrity we should expect. Nor does the fact that a single person - like a Senate Majority Leader - can refuse to consider such appointments as long as they see fit.
• The parliamentary procedures that allow the party in power to delay administrative and court justice appointments must be outlawed. When the President submits an appointment for consideration the Senate should have 30 days to confirm or reject. If they do neither in 30 days, the appointment is considered confirmed.

Prince Otto von Bismarck (1815 to 1898) was a right-wing German empire builder, statesman and master manipulator. Bismarck is credited with crafting the popular diplomatic meme: "Politics is the art of the possible". 

Since Bismarck’s time, that phrase has been used as an explanation of failure to meet expectations by diplomats and politicians alike. The need to appease self-interest always trumps fixing what is broken. No pun intended. I have no illusions. This ailment will persist. 

On this date, October 2nd, 2021, congressional gridlock swirls around money. As it always does. Spending in and on America is the constant priority of congress and the interests to which they answer. How poorly the current government itself functions - and how grave the consequence of not fixing the causes – is on no one’s agenda.

JB