How Not to Illustrate How Misinformed You Are

 

I watch a lot of YouTube and sometimes I feel that I have something to contribute to a conversation in the comments. It doesn't happen often but when I do I'll usually try to think about it a bit beforehand and carefully phrase what I say so that I'm actually making a contribution and won't be mistaken for trolling. However, sometimes I get trolled in response. There are times when people think they know about a subject but really they're not very well informed and this is about one of those situations.

 This morning I was watching one of my favorite creators who does a weekly report and they were talking about a situation where a company was fined for not keeping up with something (this is my very dumbed down summary of the whole story). The situation was something that I'm really familiar with as it's something I've done and I wanted to add my take on it, basically that just hiring more people for this task isn't always the right solution. It may not be practical and right now one of the things that may be contributing toward it is a labor shortage that we're experiencing not only globally but specifically here in the US. In the response from the content creator it was pointed out that this was happening before the pandemic which, fair enough, but there are other things which make just hiring more people the wrong solution. The labor shortage was just something that popped into my head immediately because it's affecting me right now at work.  

However, the part that really got under my skin was that someone came in and made the statement that there isn't a labor shortage, employers just don't want to pay enough. That is misinformed, and for the most part, not true. It's the result of another time someone making an assumption posting it somewhere and it being spread around like a truth. I didn't think it sounded right. I mean there are situations where companies either can't or won't pay enough to have the right kind of people in a position but you can usually hire to get somebody in the position. So I did a little research and I found out that thre is actually a PEOPLE (labor) shortage. I found more than one credible source citing four main reasons for this (actual citations at the end). 

The first is assumed to be about what's been going on during the pandemic with extended unemployment benefits and stimulus checks. To me this one doesn't make sense. On CNN the reporter rightly pointed out that the extended unemployment and stimulus checks are done and in the past. 

So what are the other 3 reasons that are being cited that actually have a basis in fact? Well the first one is childcare. A lot of women aren't returning to the workforce because child care is so expensive and it doesn't make sense for them to go back and pay more for child care than it does for them to actually stay at home. 

Another thing that's a contributing factor is that Baby boomers are actually aging out of the workplace and they're starting to retire, sometimes earlier than expected. Some baby boomers are retiring early because the housing market and stock prices are really high and they're able to afford to retire a little bit earlier than they had planned. So it seems that the Boomers that you dump on so much are a big reason for the current labor shortage. 

The last reason for labor shortage right now, specifically in certain industries like agriculture, (which by the way is driving up your food prices) is a lack of immigration. This is for a couple of reasons. One of them is the pandemic because nobody is able or willing to immigrate with the infections the way they are. In addition there is still fallout from the way Trump's policies affected immigrants.  

My response to the misinformed person was simply that my experience has been different. Since I wasn't sure if what they had said was true, I did the work to become informed. The result is this blog post. 

So in the end what I'm saying is before you jump in to debate a response to somebody's statement online make sure you know what you're talking about. A big issue I keep noticing these days is that people hear something online and accept it as truth.  We rightfully call out the conspiracy theorists and all those other crazy people about this but it happens to us too. We need to make sure that we know what we're talking about before we just start spewing things we hear online. This is how the bad stuff gets spread around. 

So the biggest reasons for the worker shortage in the US is not that companies are not willing to pay enough money, it is that childcare is too expensive, baby boomers are aging out of the workforce, and there's a lack of immigrant workers. It may also be that there are some people who are still getting unemployment benefits and still have money from your stimulus (although I can't imagine who that still is).  

There are some sources that cited workers not willing to settle for low paying jobs as a contributing factor, but it isn't all studies and it's not the sole or even main reason. There are other reasons as well, like burnout, skills mismatches, the automation of recruiting, and more. It's rare that anything is a single issue problem and focusing on just one for whatever reason can backfire. 

Sources 

Axios

CNN

CNBC

WALL STREET JOURNAL

Winter Storm Uri - Victim Blaming Texans

 

Photo taken in my back yard February 15, 2021

As I begin to write this, it’s Saturday afternoon, February 20, 2021 and I feel that I can finally take a breath.  I thought that the day that this all started, Thursday, February 11 was a day that I’d finally started to feel a weight lift as that is the day that I got my first dose of Covid vaccine.  However, that was also a day of messy wintry weather, a harbinger of what was to become Winter Storm Uri just a few days after.  

I live in Texas right now, but I was born in NJ and almost the first four decades of my life were spent there.  I experienced far worse weather than this.  Even in the 10 years in between NJ and TX that I spent in Virginia we had worse winter weather.  The difference was that we were used to it, our state infrastructure was prepared for it, and federal regulations provided oversight.  

I am luckier than most here, I did not lose power during the last week.  I don’t know what quirk of fate saved me, but I was safe and warm the whole time.  The thing is, I was waiting for my turn to lose power.  Every day, I heard from local authorities that we would have rolling blackouts, stories circulated of the rolling blackouts lasting for days, and I prepared for the worst.  I was conserving power, unplugging unnecessary appliances, keeping my thermostat at 65, and only turning a light on in the room that I was in. I found my flashlights, readied extra blankets, and charged up the power banks for my phone. 

I was still in the midst of bracing myself for the worst when I heard a strange noise coming from near my laundry room.  As I got closer, I thought “It’s too cold to be raining that hard and it sounds too close.” I opened the door to the garage to see a waterfall coming from the ceiling. A pipe had burst.  I knew where the water cutoff was, but I could not get it to turn off.  A post to the neighborhood Facebook group resulted in a helpful neighbor sending over her helpful husband with a wrench.  Again, I was blessed to be in a great neighborhood. 

My Flooded Garage

So, I sat...without running water (luckily, I have been pandemic hoarding gallons of purified water purchased at Costco) for the remainder of the week...still waiting for the power to cut off.  It never did.  I know...I know...I was incredibly lucky, but the stress of not knowing…if my hair wasn’t already prematurely white, this would have done it. 

Collecting the Melt Water From My Roof (For Flushing)

All the while I watched stories of suffering on the news and on social media.  People huddling for warmth in their own homes and those with burst water pipes in their houses and apartments. And I got to see the ugly side of the political divide…

While there were many who prayed for us, sent us their best wishes, asked what they could do, there were the others.  The “woke” people who see things in only black and white, good and evil, with us or against us.  Those who came out and said, "You voted for the government who did this to you, you deserve it." 

As part of the 60% (yes, 60%, I was surprised too...keep reading) of the population of the state who doesn’t identify as Republican, this really bothered me.  Frustrated and stressed out, I began angrily pushing back...but many stood their ground and got uglier.  I began to see what some of the political analysts are saying; the polarization of this country is not the fault of one party, but of both. 

The insane and rampant lack of empathy I encountered was incredibly disheartening.  So many told me that we should just secede like we always wanted to, that this was our own fault, that we made our bed and we have to lie in it. The left wing liberals who I aligned myself in the last election...were turning on me simply because of where I live.

The same people who retweet stories about terrible governments in other countries, gave absolutely no shits about when a state government in their own country is exposed as completely failing the citizens of that state.  And...blaming those citizens.

To those assholes, and yes, you are indeed assholes (I’m done caring if I offend the offensive assholes) let me throw some actual data at you.  According to the Pew Research Center, slightly more Texans identify as Democrat than Republican. Yes, really.  Only 39% identify as Republican or “leaning Republican” overall (Update: yes, I know this number is from 2017, but the number was the same in 2004...so it's unlikely that the percentage has changed drastically since then). 

And for you “woke” white people who were some of the most vile...more minorities in Texas identify as Democrat than Republican (according to that same Pew Report). Remember, the majority of natural disaster situations affect minority populations the most and they end up needing more assistance.  So when you say “why should the federal government bail you out?” you are actually shitting on black lives, despite the “BLM” banners you post all over your social media.

I’m going to be fine, I don’t need any bail out or assistance, but I’ve both got that white privilege and been lucky that my experience was mild as opposed to most of what you’re seeing in the media. But telling me that it’s my fault when I was sitting here scared and helpless and alone was just incredibly shitty.  And not the first time that I’ve experienced victim blaming. Yes, I said it...victim blaming.  

This whole experience brought into sharp focus that it is not the fault of one party that the country is so divided. Our current President is already getting crap for being centrist, when he actually ran on that platform.  He wants to bring us together.  However, those on the left are out for blood...they want the right to pay for what happened over the last 4 years. And you really don’t care who gets trampled on the way; even those of us who stood with you.  

Don’t get me wrong, the last guy who tried to be Emperor of America should totally have been convicted by the Senate...but making it your goal to make every single Republican pay for the last 4 years is not going to heal this country.  

The basic truth is that this country is diverse in more ways than one, not just racially and ethnically.  We are the UNITED States of America and we have to work on unity, not on getting your pound of flesh.  We have to realize that we can’t always get everything we want...there is no such thing as Utopia. There are times that you are going to have to compromise.  Just like with anything else in life. 

I’m not saying that we should meet white supremacists and other extremists halfway, but there are plenty of people who end up Republican because of a single issue that might be something we can meet in the middle on.  For instance, as someone who was around for and aware of the Cold War, I completely understand why the word “socialism” might freak someone out.   Did you in your Millenial/Gen Z privilege bubble of never experiencing the fear of the USSR dropping a bomb on your head ever consider that?

How can we meet in the middle?  I didn’t say that I have these answers, but I’m willing to consider compromise.  Are you?  Or are you a jerk without empathy who thinks that a fellow human being should suffer like some of my fellow Texans JUST because you disagree with the political party running our state government?  

If you truly believe we should all suffer, maybe you need the thoughts and prayers just as much as we do. Because I believe in Karma, and what you are doing is not good for your Karma. 

To finish...the sweetest sight and sound ever

Texas melting...enjoy!

Cancel Culture is Not a Part of Allyship

 So, this is a less political post than it is a social issue post, like the couple I did a few months ago about the BLM movement and implicit bias. I’ve been inspired lately to do a bit of introspection and research about allyship. 

What does it mean to be a true ally?  When do our efforts go in the wrong direction?  When does our allyship become performative?  All things that I started thinking about in the last couple of days due to a situation I saw blowing up on social media. I hope you’re not familiar with the situation, because it’s kind of ridiculous in the bigger scheme of things.  It also exposes me as not being as serious a person as I should be at my advanced age.  However, it started the wheels turning as I pondered what the world is coming to. 

No matter how much influence you have on social media, posting and reposting about social issues is not what makes you an ally.  One of the best quotes I’ve read that defines this for me is from an article by Casey Bond in the Huffington Post, “Social media is a tool that amplifies allyship, not encompasses it.”  Sure, use your platform to educate people, to spread information helpful to others who want to be an ally, but if you have to tell everyone that you’re an ally...you’re slipping over the line to performative allyship. You have to do more...you have to do the work. 

I have certain feelings about cancel culture and the fine line between that and calling people out or holding them accountable for problematic behavior. What I’ve figured out is that the line is not so fine as it is nonexistent. Someone who claims that they’re an ally based mostly on the fact that they are “using their platform” to call out bad behavior are less of a real ally than they think. You aren’t educating anyone by calling out this bad behavior, you’re inviting others to shame and bully them because (another point made by the Huffington Post article) most of the people you are reaching already think like you and have the same opinions you do. 

In my research to educate myself on becoming a better ally, I found a fantastic website called The Guide to Allyship. The information found there really made it clear that being an ally is more about focusing on yourself.  When it comes to holding others accountable...well, it is an aspect, but one that I feel has been blown out of proportion. 

I had to work to find source material for holding others accountable and the best version I saw was in the Harvard Business Review in regards to the workplace.  “See something, say something,” is a good approach.  It is less useful to hear about an account second hand, seek it out, then pile on the public shaming.  

It’s become a commonly held belief that the best way to change someone’s behavior is to publicly shame them.  Call them out on your large public platform, pile on with everyone else until you make them understand how horrible of a person they are.  Problem with this is that, according to an article published in Psychology Today, shaming doesn’t work.  There have been many studies on this specific issue which were also distilled into a well researched article in Scientific American that points out that shaming is traumatic and can cause long lasting psychological issues.  Interestingly enough, this effect is usually dependent on age. 

A far more useful emotion than shame in these situations is its close cousin, guilt. Shame is something someone feels about themselves.  Guilt is something they feel about something they’ve done.  Shaming someone is making someone feel like a terrible person while making someone feel guilty is making them feel terrible about something they’ve done. It’s an important distinction, but how do we engender guilt without shaming?  I stumbled upon a very interesting approach by a very interesting woman who I believe has the answer. 

Professor Loretta J. Ross is someone I think I need to spend time learning more about.  The New York Times describes her as a “A radical Black feminist who has been doing human rights work for four decades.”  From what I found in a quick search of the Internet, she seems to be very focused on fighting cancel culture, a fight I fully support. 

Her approach is to, instead of calling someone out...call them in.  She challenges calling people out, calling it toxic and a missed learning opportunity.  The alternative that she proposes is “calling in,” which is a private conversation done with respect.  She describes it as “a call out done with love” and has used this approach for many years.  I really recommend reading the NY Times article for descriptions of her experiences.

She’s also trying to spread this approach to classroom situations by addressing this in an article to teachers on the website tolerance.org.  Hopefully, educators will stumble upon this and use this lesson in classrooms to combat the continuation of cancel culture. 

While this method isn’t 100% effective, it is less traumatizing for all parties involved and does leave the opportunity for a revisit of the discussion at a later date (once you shame someone, it’s unlikely they’ll come back for more). 

I’ve always personally felt that  a calm, respectful discussion and sharing of information is a much better way to fight ignorance and bigotry than a full frontal attack.  Also, a great deal of the situations that I see people being called out for publicly are honest mistakes or a lack of knowledge or understanding.  How is making them feel like a terrible person doing anything useful?  A calm, respectful explanation of what they did wrong has a better chance of engendering the more constructive emotion of guilt instead of the destructive shame.   

And if they don’t change?  As Dr. Ross said, “You can’t be responsible for someone else’s inability to grow. So take comfort in the fact that you offered a new perspective of information and you did so with love and respect, and then you walk away.”

So, if you want to be an ally, be an ally.  Don’t point out that you are an ally at every opportunity by declaring yourself and calling out people that the masses determine are problematic.  Focus on your own education and growth and stop trying to make sure that everyone sees your allyship.  

It's over...but is it really?

I'm sorry I haven't uploaded in awhile.  What started as a passion project again got buried under a tidal wave of anxiety and despair.  I couldn't focus on this because it required me to think about what was going on.  That was more than I could bear. 

At first, I was going to address specifically a Facebook post done by a relative that repeated so many pieces of misinformation that my head hurt.  I decided not to as I know that she was not doing this maliciously, but out of fear.  She really believed all of the lies spread by the current administration and now I know why so many voted for him...he is a master manipulator.  So, instead of confronting the lies I'm going to just let the cards fall where they may.  Let the current administration speak for itself when all of those lies don't come to fruition. 

All major news outlets have now declared Biden the winner...and it's time for me to share my thoughts. 

By The Circus on SHOWTIME - YouTube, CC BY 3.0

For the first time in four years, I feel able to take a breath.  I still clearly remember waking up the morning after election day in 2016, checking the news, and feeling like I was living in an alternate universe.  A misogynist, hate mongering, shady, reality TV show character was going to be in charge of the nuclear codes, the Executive Branch of the government, the heart and soul of this country.  

I did, and I still do, find it very disheartening that people were able to put aside the indisputable evidence of his misogyny, troubling history of horrendous business practices, racism, and overall hateful rhetoric to be a single issue voter.  What I mean is the “Better this than Socialism,” or “I think Roe v Wade needs to be overturned and I don’t care about anything else” comments I heard and keep hearing.  And the horrible thing is that so many of those single issues are lies.  Nobody wants to make this a socialist country.  Nobody wants to take away your guns.  Nobody wants to raise the taxes of the lower and middle class.   NOBODY.  You’re just believing lies instead of asking questions and checking for yourself. 

The big deal seems to be the Green New Deal that the right spits out with such vitriol.  However, they don’t explain what it is, they just make blanket claims based on what the overall aim of the plan is.  Those who cry and moan about how it will destroy our country...have they actually read it?  It is available for anyone to read online.  I found a pretty good summary of it and what the new administration REALLY wants to do looking at it from a financial standpoint (which is what most of the misinformation is about) on Investopedia .

Honestly, my hatred of this administration (and you know I don’t use the H-word lightly) has less to do with politics and more to do with the tone they set for this country.  The President should think of the overall well being of the country and the people before himself.  It was very apparent that his first thought was always of himself, his feelings and his image, before thinking of his responsibilities as President. When there were riots, instead of calling a press conference urging for calm and unity, he came out with the threats and name-calling.  He did his best to escalate the unrest instead of the opposite. 

This President is a bully.  I heard more than once that we need a bully in charge...which frankly scares me.  Bullies are in charge of countries like Russia, China, and North Korea.  We’re supposed to stand up to bullies, not become them.  Not only did he not stand up to bullies, he admired and shook hands with them.  He bullied our allies...the people who were standing with us against the bullies.   Oh, and the First Lady, her pet project was anti-bullying.  Irony much?

I don’t consider myself to be Republican or Democrat.  My politics do lean left, but there are major issues that I don’t agree with that the left promotes.  The point is, that I don’t blindly follow the rhetoric of the left, despite what I’ve been accused of.  I do my research, make sure I understand all sides, and pick what feels right and good. 

So, what is happening is something we all expected.  The current administration set this up perfectly.  It has been clear for quite some time that the majority of the population is fed up with the tone of this President’s administration and the handling of the current health crisis. There was always the very real chance that there would not be a second term based on the approval ratings all along.  So, they started by dismantling the post office in order to try to disrupt voting by mail.  They then encouraged their  supporters to avoid vote by mail and claimed that it is rife with fraud (despite there being no proof).  This set it up  for original results to be Republican, but the slower to count mail in ballots to be Democrat.  This was entirely predictable...any moron could foresee this.  We were even told ahead of time that they would claim fraud.  How can you claim fraud before a fraud is committed?  And THIS is why he filled that empty Supreme Court seat so quickly. I'm not the only one who remembers the election of 2000.

We pride ourselves as the shining beacon of the best version of democracy.  However, we are losing that claim due to what is going on with this current election.  Any small time dictator in a third world country who actually fraudulently claims the win in an election will just laugh at us when we point out what they are doing is wrong and corrupt.  “Look at your elections,” they will scoff, “claims of fraud everywhere and you accuse me?”  What the current leader of the free world is doing is undercutting our democracy.  He is tarnishing our shiny past of free and transparent elections.  Now, I’m not saying they’ve always been perfect, as voter suppression is always an issue, but the votes cast have been honestly cast and fairly counted. 

This country has been divided for quite some time. However, this latest administration has actually encouraged the division, and discouraged the bi-partisanship necessary to keep this country together and on course.  And I’m not saying that the Democratic party is perfect, I’m not saying that Joe Biden will be the perfect president, but it does seem that he is trying to bring us together and stop the fear mongering and hate dividing us.  He has his job cut out for him.

And we still have to deal with the current administration for a couple more months. I fear that lawsuits and lies are only the tip of the iceberg of the damage that he will do.

The First Amendment: Part 1, Freedom of the Press

 Posts are going to be a bit less frequent as I find myself doing this thing called "research." Also, as this isn't college and this isn't a term paper I'm not going to footnote every fact I find.  I will link all of the sources I used at the bottom of the post for further reading if you are interested.  Ready for it?

I’ve decided I’m going to jump around based on my personal feelings of the most egregious abuses/attacks of/on the Constitution.  So, one of the biggest issues I have with the current Presidency is the attacks on the free press. The First Amendment, included in the Bill of Rights, does not just focus on the press:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

There is a lot to unpack there, so I’m going to divide this up into 3 parts, and not in order.  I will speak on freedom of the press first.  Probably, freedom of speech will be next and then religion.   I find it interesting that these were all lumped together, assumedly because these rights were all determined to be the most important.  Honestly, freedom of the press and freedom of speech are very intertwined, but I think there are points to be made about them separately.

Image Source: Wikimedia Commons

Freedom of the press was very important to the founding fathers. Thomas Jefferson once wrote, “Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.” Under the rule of Britain, the press was constrained against printing anything about The Crown.  Anything anti-government was considered seditious. Our Congress recognized that the press was an important watchdog over government so it was made part of the First Amendment.   

There were efforts to subvert it shortly after the Bill of Rights was ratified in the form of The Sedition Act of 1798, which allowed for the criminal prosecution of those who brought the president or the government into disrepute and ridicule.  Today, it is considered to be one of the most egregious violations of the First Amendment to date. Written and passed by the Federalists under President John Adams, it targeted dissent by the Democratic-Republicans and its leader Thomas Jefferson, who admitted to being afraid to “write what I think.” Ten people were convicted under this act (not all journalists) and later pardoned by Jefferson when he became President. 

Times were different then and it was widely known and accepted that newspapers, pamphlets, and other writings were aligned with one party or the other.  Nobody expected or assumed that the press would be non-partisan.

Today, there are some similarities with the situation back in the late 18th/early 19th Centuries.  Two parties, bitterly opposed to each other and the party in power trying to quell dissent.  However, the approach is much sneakier and makes use of two words...Fake News. 

Fake news is not a new concept, although the use of the actual phrase is relatively new. Reporting rumors and made up stories as news had long been the purview of the tabloid press and yellow journalism.  However, it wasn’t until “Pizzagate” and Hillary Clinton referring to the story as “Fake News” that her opponent picked up the term and ran with it.  

Our expectations of the free press have changed too.  Gone are the times that we expected news outlets to be non-partisan. Back in the heyday of widespread trust in journalism, when Watergate was the story on everyone’s minds, almost three quarters of Americans said that they trusted the mainstream media.  News outlets were considered to be unbiased and imbued with journalistic integrity, not identified as “Liberal” or “Conservative.” they were just the news.  

Image Source: PressThink

Today, most media outlets are identified as liberal/progressive and conservatives feel attacked by them.  The media alienated a good chunk of their audience   This made it too easy for the current administration to create a new weapon...Fake News.

All of us remember the infamous occurrence shortly before the 2017 swearing in of the new President.  During a press conference, many mainstream media outlets were denigrated, the most stand out being that CNN was called out as “Fake News” and Jim Acosta, the CNN reporter present, was not allowed to ask questions.   At the time, it was an unheard of situation and stunned many of the press.

Giving credit where credit is due, this was a genius move.  If it was claimed that these news outlets were biased, it would have left them some credulity.  Regardless of your politics, you could accept that underneath the bias of any news reporting, there was likely a grain of truth.  However, by labeling the majority of the big names in mainstream media as “fake” any assumption of credibility was immediately cut off at the knees.  

The first victim of this approach was the anonymous source.  Today, “Deep Throat” would have been dismissed as a made up source and any information attributed to him as “Fake News.”   Right now, there is a report that the President refused to visit the graves of American servicemen killed in the line of duty and described them as “losers.”  This story is being dismissed as “Fake News” because the sources of this story remain anonymous.  This is despite the fact that there are documented situations where the current President has disparaged veterans and those killed in the line of duty before out in the plain view of the public eye.  

This attack on the First Amendment is much craftier and more insidious as it is not directly “prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom” of the press.   It is making the press toothless, untrustworthy, and impotent.  The watchdog has been caged in a maze of buzzwords and insults. Citizens are confused and don’t know where to turn.  What is fake news and what is not?

As if that wasn’t enough, the President made the assertion that we need “to take a strong look at our country’s libel laws, so that when somebody says something that is false and defamatory about someone, that person will have meaningful recourse in our courts.”  This slyly implies that there is too much lying about him going on and he wants to be able to sue over it. 

However, on the bright side, some print media, such as the New York Times, has actually seen an upsurge in subscriptions and donations.  Part of it is because people appear to be looking for more reliable sources of legitimate news, but it’s also because these news outlets have created and/or tightened paywalls.  So while people are becoming more and more distrustful of broadcast news, they are looking for more trustworthy news online. 

The downside of this is that many haven't differentiated between actual journalism and social media and now use Facebook posts and Tweets as news sources.  This becomes concerning when the source of the Tweets is the President who keeps professional fact-checkers very busy.   

What changes should journalism take to combat this attack on their credibility and fight against this insidious indirect violation of the First Amendment?  I wish I had the answer.  Comment below if you have ideas or suggestions. 

Sources for further reading:

American Bar Association: Freedom of the Press: Challenges to this Pillar of Democracy

HistoryNet: Passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts

Boston University College of Communication: President Trump claims the media peddles fake news. Has it made itself an easy target?

THE FIRST AMENDMENT ENCYCLOPEDIA: Sedition Act of 1798 (1798)

The Guardian: Before Trump: the real history of fake news

USA Today: Trump to CNN: ‘You are fake news’

PressThink: Rosen’s Trust Puzzler: What Explains Falling Confidence in the Press?

Niemenlab: More Americans are paying for online news — and those who do say they’re unlikely to stop

Insurrection Act of 1807

This is by no means an expert or in-depth analysis of the laws, but my understanding of what they mean and how they apply to the current state of this country.  This is long, and I apologize, but I feel it's important. 

While I think of what I want to write about the Constitution and how it’s pretty obvious that the current President has no idea what it is or what is in it, I keep getting distracted by other things.  One of these things is the Insurrection Act of 1805.  

This is a piece of legislation that can give certain powers to the President that could be abused if said President is not the kind of person to put the needs of the people he serves above his own interests.  

Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.

Why this is currently important and why it distracted me is that this is the excuse the President is threatening to use to intervene in the current civil unrest in cities like Portland, Oregon and other areas where protests against systematic police racism tipped over into violence.   I was curious, as I am sure many are, as to whether he actually has the power to do this. 

Unfortunately, it looks like he may well have that ability, but there are some things that can limit that power. 

Let’s do some history here.  The background of this act is actually really interesting.  Do you know who is responsible for the creation of this act?  Aaron Burr...yes, that guy...the guy who killed Alexander Hamilton. 

In a nutshell, a disgraced Aaron Burr decided that since his political career was over in the newly formed United States of America, he’d grab his own piece of the continent to make a country of his own.  The Insurrection Act was passed by Congress to give Jefferson the power to thwart him with Federal troops.  He ended up not needing to do so, but he had the power just in case. You can read the entire story on the History.com website.  

The Act has been amended a few times since then, and has been invoked 22 times in total.  Out of those, only 6 times were not at the request of the state where there was some sort of unrest or violence.  So, a vast majority of those times were the governors of that state reaching out to the President asking for the assistance of federal troops.  And of the 6 that were not requested, most of those were race related and were to protect black citizens against things like the KKK and segregationists.  The last time it was invoked was in 1992 by George H.W. Bush, by request of the state of California because of the Los Angeles Riots that happened after the police who used excessive force on Rodney King were acquitted.  

So, could Trump possibly use it to quell rioting in places like Portland right now? It’s possible, but it won’t be easy for him.  

There is another law, the Posse Comitatus (the ability of an officer of the law to conscript any able bodied man to assist him) Act which puts limits on the Insurrection Act.  It states that

Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

Interestingly enough, The Heritage Foundation, a Conservative think tank provided me with the best explanation of how these two laws intersect and why the Use of 1807 Insurrection Act Should Be Last Resort for Quelling Out-of-Control Protests.

Some other interesting asides I stumbled upon while doing this research.  You may know I am a bit of a data geek.  I took a data analytics boot camp program at the University of Texas and, while I did struggle a bit (as I’m not a developer) I was fascinated by how data can be used to make sense of our world.  Despite my troubled history with numbers...they never lie.  

I found a website where data concerning political upheaval and other similar crises is aggregated and analyzed.  This is a non-profit group called The Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED).  According to their website  “ACLED collects the dates, actors, locations, fatalities, and types of all reported political violence and protest events across Africa, East Asia, South Asia, Southeast Asia, the Middle East, Central Asia and the Caucasus, Latin America and the Caribbean, and Southeastern and Eastern Europe and the Balkans’”

However with recent events, they’ve got a special project going tracking the civil unrest here in the United States.  The interesting things that their analysis shows is that first, the majority of protests have been peaceful:

Click on the image to expand

And that in Seattle, Washington, when police backed off and left the protesters to assemble peacefully, there were no riots.  The shaded part of this graph shows that period of time when police withdrew and protesters were left to assemble peacefully.

Click on the image to expand

Their overall research did show some concerning information showing that riots were not quelled, but caused by law enforcement clashing with peaceful protests.  I may do a separate blog post on this if I get a chance to analyze the data myself. 

They are constantly monitoring the situation, but did publish a report at the end of August, which you can download as well. 


So, that’s why it should be a last resort and why both governors and Congress will likely try to block the President using this power to deploy federal troops on American citizens. 

The Preamble to the Constitution

I'll try to do some research and reading this weekend on the Constitution, but there is one part it that I know well.  In fact, I have it memorized, as do so many of my fellow Gen X-ers, thanks to a great thing called "Schoolhouse Rock."

Back in the heyday day of Saturday morning cartoons, one of the best things ever was a series called "Schoolhouse Rock."   In short, animated music videos, we'd get truly educational content compressed into 3 minutes of entertainment and catchy songs.  There was "Lucky 7" where you learned about math, "Conjunction Junction" where you learned about grammar, and then there were my favorites where you learned about our government.  My generation knows all about bills and how they become laws from this amazing series.

As for me, I clearly remember getting a bonus 10 points on an exam in college because I could write down the entire Preamble to the Constitution thanks to this gem:





"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

This brief statement sets the tone of the document that is the cornerstone of our country.  While the Declaration of Independence is more celebrated in the folklore of the formation of this country, it was really just a good start.  The actual blueprint of our government is set down in the Constitution.

The Preamble tells us exactly what the Framers of the Constitution wanted to accomplish here.  They wanted to create a Utopian government...a more "Perfect Union."  The intent was good, but can any government be absolutely just, make sure that the lives of its citizens are untroubled, safe, successful and that their right to self-determination is guaranteed for all future generations?   

The rest of the document goes on to establish the framework of the government and was amended not long after it was ratified to include the Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments.  Most people are familiar with the the first few.  

Even the Framers of the Constitution were aware that the document that they all contributed to and argued over was flawed.  Ben Franklin stated, 

“I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such, because I think a central government is necessary for us… I doubt too whether any other Convention we can obtain may be able to make a better Constitution.”

I wonder if The Constitution were written now, instead of almost 250 years ago, if the people creating it would have taken a more pragmatic approach.   The idea of a Utopian anything seems to have fallen by the wayside, "you can't make all of the people happy all of the time."  However, maybe it is best to set lofty goals just to be able to say you tried your best. 

And I think that there were times that our country, as a whole, did try its best.  The problem I'm having now is that so many people aren't even trying anymore.  The success has finally gotten to the heads of the people in power to the point where they are pitting against each other those who still want that Utopian society and those who want to focus on their own personal Utopia.  

There is no domestic tranquility; we are as far from tranquil as I've ever seen.  The focus has moved on from defending our country from other countries to suppressing the populace.  Our country is troubled and unsafe, success and self-determination are reserved for the privileged.  How did we get here and how can we fix it for future generations?