Bringing home the bacon

On the use of force and the utility of impeachment; intentions vs. consequences

Did you just say “down, boy” to me?

We are currently in the throes of a food fad based on adding bacon to everything, but while we love the sweet, salty flavor, we don’t think much about where the meat came from. And when we do think of pigs, we imagine the tame farm animals; all pink, rotund, and cute. But these were bred from a much scarier creature.

The wild boar is a large, powerful beast, more than capable of goring a human to death, and more than willing to do so when enraged; it is easily enraged. Boars have a thick, protective hide, dense bones, and lots of muscle, and once they get angry, they do not quit.

Traditionally, wild boar was hunted with long spears from horseback, the better to keep those deadly tusks far away from human flesh. One characteristic feature typically found on boar spears is their crossguard, whose job is to keep the impaled boar from pushing itself up the shaft to attack the person holding it. Think about that for a moment.

As you might imagine, the wild boar is not an animal you can control through pain. And yet the strategy of pain compliance is all too often taught for defending against other humans. In particular, it has become a mainstay of “women’s self-defense”.

Most of us have seen carefully-staged videos of tiny women stomping on a large, male assailant’s instep or bonking him on the nose or twisting his wrist, causing such agony that the man gives up. It works in the videos so it must be true, amirite?

In reality, this approach is not necessarily a good idea. When the assailant is timid and unsure, expecting no resistance and perhaps unaware of the line they’ve crossed, a bit of pain might actually dissuade them, like shouting “no” but harder to ignore. But a motivated opponent, especially one who is already riled up and running on adrenaline, one unwilling to take no for an answer, may hardly feel the pain as painful and is likely to react by escalating further.

Like the wild boar, pain just makes him angry and more violent, pushing him past the point of no return. And given that the victim is fighting off someone bigger and stronger, this could end badly.

Am I suggesting that she just take it? No, not at all. Resistance isn’t futile, but it has to be based on damage, not just pain. Twisting a wrist is one thing, breaking it is another. The defense strategy that works is to take away their ability to harm, not count on psychological discouragement. To put it another way, taunting the boar is suicidal, but shooting it dead works.

Which brings us to impeachment. If we could cause Trump damage, not just pain, with impeachment, we should. So if we could follow up that impeachment in the House with conviction in the Senate, expelling him from office and exposing him to arrest for his various felonies, it would be worth doing. This remains the case even if it means incidentally providing fodder for the right-wing persecution complex.

But we can’t. The corrupt, traitorous Republicans control the Senate, and they wouldn’t convict Trump even if he confessed to the entire nation. We cannot harm Trump with this, only cause pain. And while I don’t have any hesitancy about making Trump’s life less pleasant, this is as counterproductive as smacking a boar’s snout.

If the House attempts to impeach him and either fails outright (currently likely, given the lack of support among even Democratic Representatives) or succeeds only to be blocked by the Senate, how will this damage Trump? It’ll cause him some pain, but the fascists in America are already enraged past the point of being discouraged by pain.

Instead, they will be encouraged by our show of weakness. We’ll have taken our best shot to no effect. They will see that they have nothing to fear from us, so they’ll rush to the polls, feverishly excited to re-up the fascist-in-chief’s tour of duty and hog wild about crushing “libtard snowflakes”. Meanwhile, dejected, fickle liberals will stay home and cry like sore losers, while the populist left makes a feast of Democratic misery in the primaries, further weakening the DNC and aiding Trump.

I’m sorry to say that impeachment was never the answer. Like election, impeachment is a political process, not a judicial one. It represents the will of the people, but only a minority of citizens support it. Not only is impeachment unpopular, but it’s becoming more unpopular; support dropped 12 points among Democrats between January and July of 2019, even as Trump’s approval rating has plummeted.

It’s fine to cause Trump pain through public hearings about his crimes, but the goal has to be to motivate the left, discourage the right, and appeal to the middle. That’s how we won in 2018. It’s how we will win in 2020, and when we win, Trump loses more than his job. He’ll move from the White House to the courthouse to the big house to the graveyard of history, where he belongs. It’ll be “That’s all, folks” for him.

History does not give consolation prizes for good intentions; only consequences matter. We might think we’re doing the right thing, but if the results aren’t right, then we were wrong. The moral high ground is already ours; we don’t need to do anything just to retain it. What we need is to use it to remove the party of white supremacy from power. Nothing short of that—no symbolic victory or good intentions—will do. We need to bring home the bacon, not just rile up the boar.

Foiled again

What separates conspiracy theory from conspiracy fact?

I wear the hat; it does not wear me.

Tin foil is a lie!

We use aluminum for foil these days, not tin, because it is cheaper and stronger, but we persist in calling it tin. The tin foil is inaccurately named, and everybody knows it, but I’m not proposing a swift, orderly change because this isn’t some sort of conspiracy, just imprecise language.

Whatever we call the foil, it’s pretty useful. I like to line pans and cookie sheets with it so that I don’t have to scrub them, but it’s also good for covering the thin parts of large pieces of meat to prevent burning, and of course, for storage. One thing I don’t do with it is wrap it around my head and wear it as a hat, because I’m no conspiracy theorist.

We laugh at conspiracy theorists, and we are right to do so. Whether it’s the nuts who claim we faked the moon landing or the loons who say the government is controlling our minds with fluoridation or chemtrails or microwaves, they are fools to believe as they do, and doubly so for thinking us fools for disbelieving. Perhaps the worst theories are the ones that are fundamentally political and often blatantly racist: consider such antisemitic favorites as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the blood libel, and Holocaust denialism.

At heart, conspiracy theories posit simple-sounding, emotionally-satisfying explanations for why specific things are bad. As a result—instead of having to deal with a cause that is abstract, speculative, and statistical—believers have a villain to hate.

The psychological rewards are obvious: if there’s a bad guy, then they’re the good guy. If there’s a secret plot that is hidden from all eyes, then they’re special for seeing right through it and being in the know. And if there’s something horrible that they really want to do to other people (see above), there’s a justification so overwhelming that it is (ahem) hard to believe.

Conspiracy theorists believe as they do because they want to, not because they have to. The evidence didn’t force them to accept the conclusion; the conclusion was accepted regardless of or even despite the evidence because it was desirable in itself and for what it brings. Sometimes, they posit these theories to explain away inconvenient truths that they cannot accept. And often, those who create and spread these lies do so on a knowing, self-serving basis.

What gives it away is just how unwilling they are to consider that they might be wrong. They believe (or say they do) because they want it to be true, not because it is. They implicitly recognize this, which is why they overreact to criticism by doubling down (“the more you try to dissuade me, the more convinced I become”), circular reasoning (“the fact that you’re denying it is proof that it must be true”), and paranoia used to reject expertise (“trust no one”).

But not every theory about conspiracies is a conspiracy theory in the normal sense, because there are two necessary elements. The first element of a proper conspiracy theory is that it’s about an action, often an ongoing one, that requires the long-term cooperation of many people who are working in concert to achieve their goals.

This part is actually easy; it’s literally the whole point of a political party or a corporation or a glee club (which is why we should never trust any of them unconditionally, especially not glee clubs). People “conspire”, in this limited sense, all the time, often quite successfully. The second element, which turns out to be the tricky part, is that the conspiracy has to effectively remain secret. After all, it’s not much of a conspiracy if everyone knows. Or is it?

What makes conspiracies implausible, even ridiculous, is that the more people they supposedly involve and the broader the supposed actions are and the longer they supposedly go on, the less likely it is for them to keep it all secret. With so many people, it’s only a matter of time before one of them spills the beans, or screws the pooch and is noticed.

Sure, you can try to explain this away by positing secondary conspiracies to silence, discredit, and even kill those who tell the truth about the primary one, but it quickly stretches all credulity. Two can keep a secret, if one is dead. True secrecy therefore requires a murder spree.

Consider one theory about a truly depraved conspiracy. Imagine if a prominent individual, such as a slimy, Jewish Wall Street billionaire who owns a gossip magazine, were to make a habit of hiring girls—and I do mean “girls”, as many were in their early teens—to “massage” him and perform various sex acts, sometimes by forcing them physically.

Further, imagine if he had “lent” these girls out to famous, powerful people to generate blackmail material and ensure that he was owed favors so he was able to continue enjoying his child sex ring unbothered by law enforcement. Imagine if this involved over 75 victims and went on for over 6 years. Imagine if this remained an open secret; known by many but not acknowledged, much less acted upon appropriately.

Preposterous! Except that it happened and you probably know all about it.

Ok, fine, it happened, but it’s not a proper conspiracy theory because he was unable to keep it up indefinitely. He was, however, able to keep it under wraps for a long time, and then almost entirely avoid the consequences of his crimes. He got “the deal of a lifetime”, and pretty much walked away scott free.

This travesty of justice has since received increased scrutiny, and now he’s under arrest again, so perhaps the arm of the law is long enough that even he can’t escape it, but if so, then the wheels of justice have turned exceedingly slowly, perhaps too slowly. He’s 66 years old right now, and still filthy rich, so he just might be able to drag this out until he dies. If not, he’ll die in jail, which would be just.

The lesson here is that the sort of thing that would be easy to dismiss as a conspiracy theory can actually happen in real life, it just can’t be kept secret forever. It may, however, be possible for the guilty to get away with it for quite a while. The dirty deed would not be a secret, but it also would not be broadly accepted as factual, much less result in intervention and punishment.

Now consider another theory about a conspiracy, this time with even bigger stakes. Imagine if a corrupt foreign government were to use hacking, social networks, and sexy spies to compromise powerful political organizations and even a major party so as to ensure that their asset becomes the American president. This is wild shit, straight out of the Manchurian Candidate, and yet the claim came from President Jimmy Carter and is supported by the conclusions of 16 intelligence agencies.

It turns out that it’s entirely possible to do this sort of thing, at least if you’re Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump, and to get away with it for years, though not to keep it secret. It’s been in plain sight since the primaries, but there is a gap between the truth being apparent to anyone paying attention and it being incontrovertible to the point where it cannot be ignored, even by those who would prefer to.

So far, nothing much has happened to Trump, and he may yet get re-elected instead of impeached. He may get away with it, even though his presidency is entirely illegitimate and he is a corrupt, traitorous pawn of Russia. He only has one term left, and he’s 73 and in poor health. The grave may get him before justice ever does.

There is precedent for this. Consider that Nixon was not just guilty of ordering the break-in of the DNC HQ in the Watergate Hotel, but was variously corrupt and criminal, yet it took years for him to be brought to justice. Even then, most of his violations were ignored, and he dodged the bullet by getting pardoned instead of being impeached. He never even faced criminal charges.

So, where does this leave us? Well, Carter has pointed out that the American emperor wears no clothes. Mueller did, too, albeit in drier terms and at greater length. The wheels of justice are turning, however slowly, and we can only hope that they grind exceedingly fine. Even if we never stop Trump, perhaps we can purge the Russian taint from the American right wing and block the political aspirations of the next generation of fascists, including Trump’s own children.

In the meantime, we should expect that anyone who mentions the plain fact that Trump is a traitor and the fake president can expect to be dismissed as a conspiracy theorist. With so much evidence, though, you’d have to wear a tin foil hat and pull it down over your eyes to deny the plain truth about the man in the Oval Office. The real conspiracy theory is the idea that Trump is the legitimate POTUS.