Monday, July 3, 2017

Crisis: On Females, The Media, Mika & Joe, On Brzezinski, The Press, More Lies

Sections                                                                     crisis index

1. Summary
2. Crisis Files
    A. Selections from July 3, 2017

This is a Nederlog of Monday, July 3, 2017.

1. Summary

This is a crisis log but it is a bit different from how it was the last four years:

I have been writing about the crisis since September 1, 2008 (in Dutch) and about the enormous dangers of surveillance (by secret services and by many rich commercial entities) since June 10, 2013, and I probably will continue with it, but on the moment I have several problems with the company that is supposed to take care that my site is visible and my health.

As I explained, the crisis files will have a different format from July 1, 2017: I will now list the items I selected as I did before (title + link) but I add one selection from the selected item to give my readers a bit of a taste of the item linked.

So the new format is as follows:

      Link to an item with its orginal title, followed by
      One selection from that item (indented)
      Possibly followed by a brief comment by me (not indented).

This is illustrated below, in selections A.

2. Crisis Files

A. Selections from July 3, 2017

The items 1 - 6 are today's selections from the 35 sites that I look at every morning. The indented text under each link is quoted from the link that starts the item. Unindented text is by me:

1. The Battle Over What It Means to Be Female

Patriarchy, across the globe, plagues humankind. In some regions female fetuses often are aborted because they are considered less valuable than male fetuses. Girls are sometimes smothered in infancy. Many women and girls are sold to men as rape and breeding slaves. Many endure genital mutilation. Many are trafficked and forced into prostitution. Many are denied abortions and access to birth control. Many, to survive economically, sell their eggs to donors or hire their wombs out to couples who cannot produce babies. In some countries, including Saudi Arabia and parts of India, women are considered the property of male guardians. There are villages in India where women have only one kidney because their husbands have sold their other one. Women are often denied education and, even in industrial countries, are paid less for carrying out the same work as men.

How, in an age in which some born with male bodies self-identify as women, can those born female define their unique oppression based on their experience? As laws in Europe, Canada and the United States are rewritten to broaden the definition of what it means to be female or male, how will such change affect the struggle for equality by those born as females?

The debate over gender identity pits the trans narrative against radical feminists. It is one of the most bitter and acrimonious battles on the left. Radical feminists are castigated by many on the left as reactionary for their insistence that those born female hold a unique and separate identity as an oppressed group, one that requires them to form protected spaces and organizations.

This is the beginning of three pages by Chris Hedges. I think I am on the side of the "radical feminists", and I have three reasons:

1. I am a psychologist who does not believe in transgenders:

To me, it seems that transgenderism this is a way for medical people to make a lot of money by restructuring the bodies of children who, for whatever reasons, that probably have a lot to do with what adults around them believe, have come to believe themselves that "they are in the wrong body".

This is also - in spite of what transgenders say - wholly new and depends on modern medicine. And while I don't mind if some male wants to dress up like a female, or some female wants to dress up like a male, which I agree has been happening for many centuries, I disagree with rebuilding - operating genitals, taking lots of hormones - children of 8 or so because they say "I am in the wrong body".

I am sorry, but that sounds more like being deeply confused (in 8 or 10 year olds) and may require some therapy. Operating the genitalia of children, and provinding massive doses of hormones does not seem advisable, to my mind.

2. There also is another reason, and that is personal:

I am ill for nearly forty years, and what I complain about is that I have muscle aches and very little energy, for nearly forty years now. My consistent experience is that over 9 out of 10 of the medics I have seen deny that has a medical cause, and call me - and 17 million others - "a psychosomatizer", which is to say that they claim I am not sane.

When I counter that I did make a brilliant M.A. in psychology while I was ill, and did so without following any lectures because I was too ill, which also makes me know a lot more about psychology than people with degrees in medicine, and that those who say my complaints are unreal certainly do not know everything there is to know medically, I may be shown the door (as happened when I said this to medical doctors of the University of Amsterdam).

In contrast, if I were an 8 year old boy who says "I am in the wrong sexual body, for really I am a girl", the same medical people very well may believe such an 8 year old and start operating and restructuring their bodies in major ways.

3.  So basically I think medicine is quite sick these days:

Adult people who say they have muscle aches and very little energy (there are some 17 million people with ME/CFS, and I am one of them since 1.1.1979) are criminalized by medical people as insane psychosomatizers because the medical people cannot find a medical cause [1]; children who say "my mind belongs in the body of the opposite sex" are believed on psychological grounds, and are medically operated and massively restructured.

Both seem ethically mistaken and without any good basis in real factual knowledge. (And as note [1] explains, there are now very good reasons to say that ME/CFS is a - seriously invalidating - real disease, but psychiatrists may need another 40 years to even admit the possibility. [2])

2. Trump’s Media Takedown Goes Meta: President Tweets Ludicrous WWE Video—But Why?

President Donald Trump continued his seemingly baffling and self-destructive crusade against the media on Sunday morning, tweeting a crudely altered video clip that depicts him tackling and repeatedly punching the major news network, CNN.

The original video came from Trump’s infamous WWE appearance in 2007 when he tackled Vince McMahon, the company’s chairman, to the floor and continued to punch him. (In case you are not clear on the concept, pro wrestling is not a legitimate sport and Trump’s appearance was a scripted stunt.) In Trump’s tweeted version on Sunday, the CNN logo was placed over McMahon’s face.

The answer to the question "But Why?" is that Donald Trump is a megalomaniac.
In other words, he is not sane (as indeed many psychologists and psychiatrists have said: See the last link, for one example).

3.  Joe And Mika Owe America An Apology
Most media reports have portrayed Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski as aggrieved victims of Donald Trump’s Thursday Twitter tantrum. It can’t be pleasant to be attacked so personally by the president, but Scarborough and Brzezinski are fighting back. On their MSNBC show “Morning Joe” on Friday and in an op-ed column in the Washington Post entitled “President Trump Is Not Well,” they chastised Trump for his vicious and vulgar attacks on her appearance, for referring to her as “low I.Q. Crazy Mika” and him as “Psycho Joe.” They denied Trump’s claim that she had plastic surgery and that she was “bleeding badly from a face-lift” when she and Scarborough visited Trump’s private club at Mar-a-Lago in Florida last year. They also levied a serious charge that Trump tried to blackmail them by threatening a negative story about the couple in the National Enquirer unless they asked Trump (who is close to the tabloid’s publisher) to have the story killed.
But Scarborough and Brzezinski are hardly emblems of journalistic integrity or political courage. Let’s not forget that the “Morning Joe” cohosts, particularly Scarborough (a former Republican Congressman from Florida), are partly responsible for Trump becoming president. They’ve known Trump for over a decade and were once among his biggest fans.
Yes, I agree - but I think what is really happening is not quite as it seems to be and as it is presented by Brzezinksi and Scarborough. Then again, the writer of this article is quite right in saying that "Scarborough and Brzezinski are hardly emblems of journalistic integrity or political courage", abd that Scarborough is "a former Republican Congressman" (bolding added by me).

And what seems more important to me is that Mika Brzezinski is the daughter of Zbigniew Brzezinski (<-Wikipedia), who recently died, and who was for over forty years a very important man in various roles relating to the USA's "national security".

4. Solving Donald Trump's Mystery

On June 30, Scarborough and Brzezinski wrote an opinion piece in The Washington Post titled “Donald Trump is not well.” In that piece, they detailed the several insulting remarks he has been making about them (“low I.Q. Crazy Mika”, “Psycho Joe”) which prompted them to state, “America’s leaders and allies are asking themselves yet again whether this man is fit to be president. We have our doubts, but we are both certain that the man is not mentally equipped to continue watching our show, ‘Morning Joe.’”

Mr. Trump’s behavior seems to be taking a turn for the worst. This is a fact, according to Ms. Brzezinski and Mr. Scarborough, acknowledged by even some of Mr. Trump associates. In their op-ed piece they conclude, “We, too, have noticed a change in his behavior over the past few years. Perhaps that is why we were neither shocked nor insulted by the president’s personal attack. The Donald Trump we knew before the campaign was a flawed character but one who still seemed capable of keeping his worst instincts in check.”

Never before in recent history has an American President been as questioned about his mental health to hold office as Mr. Trump. His erratic behavior has prompted some Democrats to urge their colleagues to get behind a bill that could potentially oust the real President Trump from office should it be proven that he is mentally or physically unfit.
As I said in the previous bit: I think - as an M.A. in psychology - that Trump is insane.

But this does not mean that I admire Brzezinski or Scarborough: In fact, I think they are some of the public representatives of the Deep State, who are trying to tame Trump because they found he is not sane, and is not amenable.

The real situation is too complicated to explain here and now, but has a great lot to do with the ideas of
Zbigniew Brzezinski from 1968 (!!), when he wrote - literally - the following:
'it will soon be possible to assert almost
continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain  up-to-
date, complete files, containing even personal information
about the health and personal behaviour of the citizen, in
addition to the more customary data.'
It was also added by the writer (Stephen Spender) in 1969 that
Moreover it will be possible to anticipate and plan to meet any
uprisings in the future. The police will even be able to forecast
crises before the rioters themselves are conscious of wanting them.
And this is quoted from the Wikipedia-article (in 2008 [3]) on Zbigniew Brzezinski from something he wrote in 1970:  
"The technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities." – Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era, 1970
My own conclusions are these (and I am sorry to be very pessimistic):

(1) The personal computer was intentionally designed to spy on everyone.
(2) The personal computer (laptop, cellphone, etc.) that is connected to the
     internet is THE instrument to give ALL power to the VERY few.
(3) The personal computer is THE instrument to realize neofascism, and to
       terrorize everyone who is opposed to this.

For more see my Crisis: propaganda and Control: Brezezinski 1968

5. Trump’s Escalating Assault on the Press

Trump began his presidency attacking the press for “fake news.” Then he called the networks and publications that criticized him “enemies of the people.”

His new attacks seem to be going a step farther – mobilizing his supporters against media personalities and executives that are critical of him.

As the tweets and rallies become shriller and more provocative, their clear message is that Trump’s critics are bad people who are conspiring to undo his presidency – people whom Trump supporters must “not let” silence him, who deserve to be slammed the way Trump took it out on CNN in the mock video he posted Sunday morning.
Will news organizations be intimidated? Probably not, at least not at this point. But we may be on a slippery path. Trump’s increasingly incendiary tweets and messages constitute an overt assault on freedom of the press, the cornerstone of our democracy.

What the president of the USA seems to be saying is: Anybody who physically attacks one of my opponents, is completely justified, since I would do the same: Watch me do it! Watch me! This is how it should be done!

I say that the president of the USA is insane and a neofascist (in my sense of that term, that is explained in the last link).

6. Yet More Jaw-Dropping Lies From the Trump Administration

Obamacare reduced the number of uninsured from 44 million to 28 million. Trump is right that this is still too many, but Trumpcare would increase the number to 47 million within five years of passage.

Oh, and Obamacare didn’t raise average family premiums by $3,000 either. The best comparison I can find is for individual premiums, and Brookings estimates that they decreased about $700 after Obamacare went into effect. Add in an average subsidy of about $400, and individual premiums went down $1,100. Family premiums followed the same trajectory, and probably decreased about $3,000 or so.

Obamacare is hardly faultless, but overall it’s been enormously successful. It delivered insurance to millions who couldn’t get it before; it reduced premiums for most people; it required health care policies to deliver decent coverage; and it prohibited insurance companies from turning down people with pre-existing conditions. Trumpcare would undo all of that. All of it.

This is by Kevin Drum, and I think he is right - and Trump and the Republicans deal with poor/non-rich people as if they have no rights to live nor to happiness, and that they therefore are better of dead, which they will help bring about by denying them any medical insurance or by making it simply too expensive to pay.

And Trumpcare seems to be designed to do just that: Kill the ill non-rich by denying them medical insurance and thus drive them so suicide.

[1] Meanwhile, there is excellent empirical evidence, that was mostly established by the Norwegian medical doctors Fluge and Mella plus 15 others, that people with ME/CFS are really ill:

In over 200 people with ME/CFS it was found that when they are compared to healthy people, they many shortages in amino acids, and some excesses in the same, which indeed also provides an explanation-in-principle why they lack energy, are tired and have muscle aches.

For more, see my
me+ME+Crisis: About ME/CFS - 1: Some updates about Oystein Fluge and Ron Davis.

[2] During my study of psychology, I learned nothing about psychiatry, and this was for a very good reason:

Nearly all psychologists I know (quite a few) believed psychiatry is a pseudoscience.

And I think - knowing now a whole lot more of psychiatry, and having studied the sick and degenerate DSMs (that presently allow over 400 ways to declare people insane, which is about ten times (!!) more than from the 1950ies till the 1970ies) - that they were quite right in that.

[3] I like(d) Wikipedia, but I fear these days many entries are modified by people who are in the pay of the Koch brothers or other rich rightists. (I have no proof, but I have been reading a whole lot of the Wikipedia for many years. Also, I never contributed to Wikipedia, in part because the contributors are anonymous: I dislike people who cannot possibly be found out personally.)

       home - index - summaries - mail