The War on Truth Reaches Its Climax

[maestrob]

Trump is telling two big lies, and a third will come soon.


By Paul Krugman
Opinion Columnist

Nov. 2, 2020


I began writing a column for The Times way back in 2000. My beat was supposed to be economics and business. But I couldn’t help noticing that one of that year’s contenders for the presidency was systematically making false claims about his policy proposals. George W. Bush kept insisting that his one-percent-friendly tax cuts were targeted on the middle class, and his plan to privatize Social Security just wished away the system’s obligations to older Americans.

At the time, however, my editors told me that it wasn’t acceptable to use the word “lie” when writing about presidential candidates.

By now, though, most informed observers have, I think, finally decided that it’s OK to report the fact that Donald Trump lies constantly.

Many of the lies are trivial, often bizarrely so, like Trump’s repeated claims to have received an award that doesn’t even exist. But the president has closed out this year’s campaign with two huge, dangerous lies — and there’s every reason to fear that this week he will roll out a third big lie, perhaps even more dangerous than the first two.

The first big lie is the claim that America is being menaced by hordes of “rioters, looters, arsonists, gun-grabbers, flag-burners, Marxists.”

Anyone who walks around the “anarchist jurisdictions” of New York or Seattle can see with their own eyes that nothing like this is happening. And the data bear out the obvious. One systematic study found that the summer’s Black Lives Matter protests were overwhelmingly peaceful, and that “most of the violence that did take place was, in fact, directed against the B.L.M. protesters.”

Oh, and Trump keeps claiming that Joe Biden won’t condemn the small amount of violence that has actually happened — when Biden has, in fact, done exactly that.

So Trump wants Americans to be terrified of a menace that exists only in his imagination. At the same time, he wants us to ignore the very real menace of Covid-19.

Over the past few months Trump has effectively abandoned any effort to limit the spread of the coronavirus. In fact, he has been actively promoting that spread. One credible Stanford study estimated that Trump rallies, which involve large numbers of shouting people packed closely together, most unmasked, have caused around 30,000 infections and 700 deaths.

But Trump wants Americans to believe that the pandemic — which killed more Americans last month than are murdered in a typical year — is fake news. We’re “rounding the corner,” he insists, even as infections and hospitalizations are rising at a terrifying rate. The news media is going on about “Covid, Covid, Covid” only because it’s out to get him. Doctors are inflating the reported death toll because they want to make more money.

These big lies are immensely destructive, and not just because they lead to bad policies. Like it or not, presidential rhetoric affects how millions of Americans behave.

Trump’s lies about an anarchist threat have given encouragement to white supremacists, including domestic terrorists. His dismissal of the pandemic threat, his mocking of precautionary measures like mask-wearing, have done a lot to help the coronavirus spread.

But the worst may be yet to come.

It’s possible — barely — that Trump will legitimately win re-election, although this would require that the polls be much further off than they were in 2016. If that doesn’t happen, however, it’s a near-certainty that he will refuse to accept defeat quietly.


Unless he loses in an overwhelming landslide, he has indicated he will try to steal the election by blocking the counting of Biden votes, with the aid of partisan judges. I don’t think he’ll succeed, but I wish I was sure of that.

What if he doesn’t manage to hang on to office? We all know what’s likely to come next: claims that he was robbed. He’ll claim that millions of people voted illegally — after all, he did that following the 2016 election, denying that he lost the popular vote. He’ll probably claim that millions of Trump votes were somehow discarded — after all, he has already made the false claim that ballots are being “dumped in rivers.”

And he’ll find a receptive audience. Professional forecasters have considered Biden the heavy favorite for a long time, but according to a late September Gallup survey, 90 percent of Republicans expect Trump to win. If he loses, our conspiracy-minded right will react with shock and rage.

The immediate result may very well be a wave of violence and property destruction — Trump supporters engaging in the behavior they falsely attribute to Black Lives Matter demonstrators. But that’s actually the part that worries me least.

No, the really big danger is that millions of our citizens will probably buy into an American version of the “stab in the back” myth that loomed large after Germany’s defeat in World War I, claiming the military was betrayed by the civilian government. And those voters may well end up choosing the G.O.P.’s next presidential candidate.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/02/opin ... e=Homepage

[Holden Fourth]

I'm pleased Mr Krugman describes himself as an Opinion Columnist as he himself continues the 'war on truth'. I have no views on what he's talking about, (I personally don't give a excrement about anything Trump does) but this type of specious drivel is a good example of what the media have become.

[diegobueno]

Nevertheless, it's all true.

[Belle]

I'm pleased Mr Krugman describes himself as an Opinion Columnist as he himself continues the 'war on truth'. I have no views on what he's talking about, (I personally don't give a excrement about anything Trump does) but this type of specious drivel is a good example of what the media have become.

You've nailed that correctly!! No matter the electoral outcome there will be a day of reckoning for big tech and the mainstream media for the lies, hectoring, activism, censorship and outright viciousness. I agree with Trump when he calls them the "Lame-stream media". That doesn't make him the ideal person but there's often much truth in his off-the-cuff statements. I've been saying much the same thing myself for 2 or 3 years now; I'm glad Trump has caught up with me!!!

[maestrob]

I'm pleased Mr Krugman describes himself as an Opinion Columnist as he himself continues the 'war on truth'. I have no views on what he's talking about, (I personally don't give a excrement about anything Trump does) but this type of specious drivel is a good example of what the media have become.

Well, Holden, you say you have no views on what he's talking about, yet you then express one!

To update you: Paul Krugman has taught economics at both Princeton (where he is now a Professor Emeritus) and MIT who has been reporting on the economic disaster that republican policies have been for working Americans. In 2008 he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics for his work on New Trade Theory and the New Economic Geography in 2008, the sole recipient for that year. He actually started out his career working in the Reagan White House. Since you might not credit what the N. Y. Times says about him, I've posted his Wikipedia page here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Krugman



Krugman's 2004 book The Great Unraveling correctly predicted the housing crash of 2008, brought about by Republican deregulation of our banking system, which had been stable from Franklin Roosevelt's time until the savings bank crisis began because of Republican legislation enacted in 1980 and 1982. George H. W. Bush was left to clean up that mess. You good folks in Australia never suffered the effects of the world-wide depression that began in 2008 because your economic policies were quite sensible at the time, but we Americans remember it well, including two(!) nearly trillion-dollar taxpayer bailouts that were necessary to save our bank depositors and two out of three car companies (GM & Chrysler: Ford was able to survive on its own without government help.).

Be that as it may, Krugman has earned my respect over the years: he does not write "specious drivel." He speaks truth to power.

When I first posted here, it was in response to the terrifying first Biden-Trump debate where Trump shouted down both Biden and the moderator. I don't know if you read that post, but here it is again (with slight revisions). It's basically about how Republican economic policies have been ruinous to the working class and our economy in this country for 100 years or so. In fact, Teddy Roosevelt was the first Progressive to propose universal healthcare even before that. We now pay twice the dollar amount per capita that other advanced countries do per capita for healthcare, yet our outcomes are worse, thanks to sustained opposition to universal coverage by Republicans and the insurance lobby.

So, here's the text of that original post below:

Been thinking hard about what I posted here last Wednesday, and have been editing, adding and revising the text. Rather than go through the process of revising my original post, I've decided to post the revised text here complete. Here are a few additional facts that I'd like to point out before I do so.

1) The Federal minimum wage in the USA has dropped in actual purchasing power to less than 1/3 of what it was when I was going to Villanova full time in the late 1960's, especially during the last 30+ years when Republicans have (mostly) controlled Congress. In those days I was able to afford my own car and associated expenses (insurance, gas, repairs, etc.), suits to go to work (I worked at department stores up to 35 hours/week in a nearby mall, and in those days you were required to wear dress clothes both to classes in my Freshman year and on the job.). All that while I was earning $1.80/hour. That's not possible on the current paltry Federal minimum of $7.25 an hour, although many Democratic states have raised their minimum to as high as $15.00/hr. Compare that to, say, Denmark, where McDonald's workers earn $22.00/hr. and enjoy free health care from their government, paid sick leave, maternity leave, etc.

2) Union membership, again because of Republican hostility, has dropped from over 50% of the workforce during the 1950's and 60's to roughly 10% now. Not to mention the disappearance of pensions and healthcare coverage in retirement from your employer. My father enjoyed both of these benefits in retirement: not so for the vast majority of my generation (Barely 10% of current retirees now have pensions.).
3) The recent trend in corporate America (including well-known banks) has been to classify many employees as "contract workers," which makes them ineligible for many benefits, and lets the corporations involved off the hook for paying their share of Social Security taxes, unemployment insurance taxes, and providing health insurance, all of which costs suddenly become the 100% responsibility of the employee while making them ineligible for the few corporate pension plans that are still available. This has been especially prevalent since Obamacare became the law of the land. Many court challenges to this patently illegal practice have happened, most notably when the State of California sued Uber and won, prompting Uber to threaten to leave the state! AFAIK, no deal has yet been finalized as of this date.
4) DJT is the first President in our history to undermine democratic norms. Here's how one example of this works: All employees of our Federal Government swear an oath to uphold and protect our Constitution, whether in the military, elected to public office (including the President, Vice President and both branches of Congress, the Senate and House of Representatives), appointed to the Judiciary, or appointed to the many branches of the Executive, including the leaders of the FBI, CIA, Homeland Security, FDA, CDC, etc., all Cabinet Members, and all those who are employed and report to them. Trump is the first President in our history to require that all these employees should be personally loyal to HIM. If you're not, you're gone! Look at what happened to FBI Director James Comey, and all those brave souls who testified against DJT in the impeachment hearings. All dismissed, careers and lives ruined, as well as all the cabinet members who stood up to him, including the great Generals Trump was so proud of in the beginning of his administration. This is how autocrats operate, such as Erdogan in Turkey, and the present-day leaders of Poland (Andrzej Duda) and Hungary (Janos Ader), all of whom are members of and at odds with the European Union Government, and are leaning towards Russia despite their recent history of oppression by that country, thus risking expulsion for their style of governing. Trump also seems to cower before Putin personally, even while our government continues to impose sanctions on Russia since Putin's illegal annexation of the Crimean Peninsula and the continuing war in Eastern Ukraine.

Here’s my reaction to the first “Presidential” debate.

So, here's the revised and updated text below:

Here’s my reaction to the first “Presidential” debate.
My wife (who grew up in a dictatorship) and I both couldn't sleep last night after watching what Dana Bash on CNN called a "sh!t show."

Trump would not denounce violence on the right, and told the Proud Boys, a violent right-wing neo-Nazi militia, to "stand back and stand by."

Biden, in contrast, denounced violence "in any form, from anybody."

I despair for American democracy. The entire Republican party has been moving towards rule by the minority for years, with their tactics of refusing to consider in the Senate Barack Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland, who was nominated 10 months before an election, etc.

I watched in horror as DJT "won" the election in 2016, in spite of receiving more than 3 million less votes than Hillary Clinton. He has been moving to undermine our democratic values ever since. Last night's debate was the culmination of that toxic presidency.

He will lose this election if voting is allowed to go forward and counting is not halted by the Supreme Court, as it was in 2000. What concerns me most is that in America, we now have an entire political party that stands against democratic values, and will back the next Republican candidate who will be smoother and far more subtle than DJT, a candidate who will undermine our democracy and establish a soft dictatorship similar to Erdogan in Turkey, ignoring and/or undermining all of the protections of human rights and dignities that have been established since FDR and Teddy Roosevelt, such as the financial safety net (Social Security, pension security (yes, pensions here are guaranteed by the Federal Government if they go bankrupt), food stamps, unemployment insurance, etc.) that guarantee human dignity if chance wrecks one's life. Republicans have stood against these programs since they were enacted, forcing FDR to defend Social Security in front of the Supreme Court, and now likewise, Obamacare, several times.

For example, 70% of the American public supports a woman's right to choose to have an abortion (including many Catholics), yet soon 6 out of 9 Supreme Court justices will not support that right, all because of Mitch McConnell's scheming in the Senate.

This is not White Supremacy in action, it's much more subtle and deeper than that. It is now becoming more brutal, because Republicans know that their policies are not supported by the majority of our population, so they are now resorting to provoking violence to intimidate those of us who are sensible people in the majority.

I live in New York, where we are testing currently at 1% for Covid-19 because our population is sensible. We wear masks, keep socially distant, and test our essential workers (police, firemen/women, hospital workers, etc.) on a regular basis. Also, I feel safe walking our streets because demonstrators are non-violent when they happen, although our police did shoot and kill two Black men in July during a march. The uptick in violence here is in poor neighborhoods where many people are out of work, out of money and cooped up together all day long, so domestic violence is on the rise, I admit that. BUT, this is happening all over the country, and is decidedly NOT a result of Democratic mis-management of our city, as charged by Republicans. So nuts to that!

As an example of Republicans moving to hold on to power just happened in the swing state of Florida this year. There are currently roughly more than 700,000 ex-felons living in Florida, most of them minorities who would vote Democratic if given the chance. In last year's election, Florida's population, in a bi-partisan moment, voted overwhelmingly to restore voting rights to ex-felons in a plebiscite, which the Republican-controlled state government had denied for ages, knowing that their rule would be threatened. What did they do in response? Suddenly, the Republican-controlled government passed a new law, stating that ex-felons had to repay all their court costs and fines before they could have the right to vote! That law is now being challenged, of course, but the issue will not be resolved until after the election this year, and will be heard by the Republican-controlled federal Supreme Court in any case. Yes, there is a movement on the left to raise funds to pay these fines and costs (Michael Bloomberg has offered, IIRC, to contribute $100 million to the effort), but the total cost is a staggering $1 billion, and the deadline for payment to be received is IIRC October 8!

Remember, most of these 700,000 ex-felons (a vast majority of whom would vote for Democrats) have already served their time and thus have paid their debt to society, but they are mostly poor and without jobs, so coming up with even $500 each is beyond their means. By contrast, when the Supreme Court halted the vote counting in Bush v. Gore in 2000, Bush was ahead in the entire state of Florida by only 534 votes. Thus, George W. Bush was installed in the White House based on 534 votes in Florida. We know what happened next.

Republicans have been hurting the American economy for 100 years, causing crisis after crisis. Here's the list:

Herbert Hoover (a businessman), caused the Great Depression in 1929. When the stock market crashed that year, Hoover’s laissez-faire economic policies (He famously thought that the economy would “heal itself.”) resulted in a nearly 25% unemployment rate and millions of small business bankruptcies. In 1932 FDR began to save us from that with massive works projects and the beginnings of our modern safety net for working families. While Republicans urged that we should stay out of the war in Europe, when we were attacked at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, they had no choice but to go along with FDR and declared war on Germany and Japan. During the 1930's, FDR created Social Security, and along with deficit spending for WWII, we finally climbed out of that financial debacle, in spite of Republican opposition to FDR's policies.
The exception here was Eisenhower, who was a Democrat who ran on the Republican ticket first in 1952 because he knew he could win against Adlai Stevenson, an intellectual and a former U. N. Ambassador, who was a weak candidate. Eisenhower was the General who led the U. S. to victory in Europe in WWII, thus a national hero. There was no contest, and Eisenhower won both terms in landslide victories. He continued the post WWII prosperity begun under FDR and Harry Truman, was friendly with unions, built up our modern highway and bridge system to make transportation more efficient and ended the Korean War. He also sent in Federal troops to support the Supreme Court’s ruling on school segregation, a very brave thing to do in 1950’s America.

Nixon imposed price controls during my college years in a vain attempt to stop inflation. It didn't work, especially when the oil embargo happened, causing gasoline shortages, thus laying the groundwork for the terrible stagflation of the 1970's. Then there was Watergate.....
Nixon’s Vice President, Gerald Ford, succeeded him for the remainder of his second term when Nixon was forced to resign. Ford is known for two things. He pardoned Nixon so that he couldn’t be prosecuted for his crimes committed while in office, ostensibly to “heal” the nation and move past the Watergate scandal. That decision cost him the next election, and he was succeeded by Jimmy Carter, a Democrat who is still alive and now, at 96, our oldest living former President. Then, Ford famously told New York City, which was teetering on the verge of bankruptcy in 1975, to “Drop dead!” when we asked for Federal help. This, one year before our national bicentennial celebration! Republicans have been hostile to urban areas consistently for generations, but this open display of contempt resonated throughout the country. Luckily, local leaders and financial experts were able to work out a deal to save the situation, which would have crashed our local economy and cost the Federal government millions in lost tax revenue. New York for centuries has sent more tax revenue to Washington than we receive in Federal benefits and subsidies, but did Republicans care or acknowledge that? Not then, and they still don’t.

Reagan began to unravel the regulations that had kept our banking system stable since the 1930’s by deregulating the savings banks and, for the first time in history, taxed Social Security and unemployment payments. Thus began the savings bank crisis, where hundreds of banks around the USA were looted by their owners and CEO's and had to close, forcing enormous costs on to U. S. taxpayers by forcing the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to pay off depositors. Reagan also reversed his early attempts to cut taxes as the Federal deficit ballooned, and his successor, George H. W. Bush, despite his election promise at his nominating convention ("Read my lips....NO new taxes!), also had to raise taxes for the same reason in the middle of a mild recession, thus costing him re-election. (Remember voodoo economics?) Our banking system was in tatters by then, but Bill Clinton managed to pass new regulations and raise taxes to balance our budget despite 100% Republican opposition, so things settled down again while we had a decade of prosperity. Then, Newt Gingrich happened, and Republicans took control of Congress for the first time since the 1920’s. Economic disaster again followed.

While Democrat Bill Clinton, under terrific pressure from the newly established republican Congress under Newt Gingrich, did sign a Republican-passed bill dissolving the Glass-Steagall Act that had kept our savings and commercial banks separate and stable since the 1930’s, he also was pressured by Alan Greenspan in 1999. Clinton was the ONLY President in the past 100 years to leave us with a surplus in the Federal budget.
Enter George W. Bush, who never saw a business regulation that he liked, who then cut taxes again and deregulated businesses. What did we get? The Great Recession, frozen credit markets, another stock market crash, and another massive bailout of both the banking and automobile industries (GM & Chrysler, although not Ford, who bravely refused government money), all again at taxpayer expense! Not to mention all the lies about Iraqi WMD, and a $2 trillion dollar war.

Again, Democratic President Obama had to step up and put our economy back in order for us.

At this point, I think I've said enough about history for one morning.

In conclusion, let me say that I am a proud WASP (white, Anglo-Saxon Protestant). Proud of my heritage (one of my family branches goes back to the mid-1600's; they founded a furniture company that was quite successful in New England.). I look on my French/Irish/British/German heritage with great respect (My French ancestors fled France in 1791 to avoid the guillotine, and settled in Philadelphia in the early 1800's after fleeing a slave rebellion in St. Thomas.). I also had an ancestor who fought in the Civil war as a colonel on the side of the North. That said, contrary to Republicans' denigrating of immigrants, frankly, immigrants have saved my life several times and, since moving to NYC, have contributed immensely to my growth as a person, making me a better human being. Immigration is good for America overall. Immigrants allow us to grow and prosper and improve our imperfect society, always bending the curve towards freedom and prosperity in the long run. In America, we are at our best when we allow all people to contribute to our society to the best of their ability.

Thus, I fear with the current Republican Party, we may lose that ability to grow and prosper that I have experienced through my lifetime if they seize control of our government, either in this election or sometime in the near future.

Republicans, through voodoo economics and intolerant social policies, have caused great damage to our society throughout my lifetime. They should not be permitted to continue as an ongoing political force in our country, and should be replaced by another, saner opposition party, with better, more constructive ideas. Among them should be the abolishment of Fox News, which has turned into a state propaganda machine that spouts irrationality, unreality and hate. Long ago, our Supreme Court ruled that it was illegal to shout "Fire!' in a crowded theater when there is no fire. Based on the same principle, Fox News has been shouting "Fire!' for decades when there is no fire, and should be closed down. Freedom of speech has its limits, especially when that speech harms our society, which Fox obviously does.
Just to make sure I'm clear, what I'm proposing is a new legal category of hate speech, which would be hate speech against society in general. This would require, of course, debating new legislation and new court contests, inspiring new rulings. This of course exists in Europe due to a reaction to the horrors of WWII in France and Germany, as well as other countries elsewhere, but in the USA we have never truly debated the issue.

But enough. I've had my say. It's not too late. VOTE! And continue to vote for sanity, until these mad ideas fade away. And please pray for the future of the United States.
Thanks for reading.

[barney]

It's interesting that our resident right-wingers, Belle and Holden Fourth, in attacking the media still don't try to defend Trump. Even they recognise that he is indefensible.
And now, as it seems he might go down, he's flailing and lying and destroying democracy with his claim that he won but for massive fraud - without presenting a skerrick of evidence. What an utterly loathsome human being.

[Holden Fourth]

It's interesting that our resident right-wingers, Belle and Holden Fourth, in attacking the media still don't try to defend Trump. Even they recognise that he is indefensible.
And now, as it seems he might go down, he's flailing and lying and destroying democracy with his claim that he won but for massive fraud - without presenting a skerrick of evidence. What an utterly loathsome human being.

I don’t defend Trump for the simple fact that I don’t view myself as a right winger - or a left winger either. I’m not even sure what a right winger in the US is.

I’ve had this image of a red neck, sexist, monetarist, predominantly Anglo Saxon male which I am sure is not even close to the RW concept.

Maybe I’m centrist or maybe I’m simply undecided. The bottom line is that I have my own opinions which tend to be based on my experiences. If others see that as right wing then so be it.

One thought - where did the terms right and left wing originate? I wonder what they originally meant and how they compare to today’s concept?

[barney]

It's interesting that our resident right-wingers, Belle and Holden Fourth, in attacking the media still don't try to defend Trump. Even they recognise that he is indefensible.
And now, as it seems he might go down, he's flailing and lying and destroying democracy with his claim that he won but for massive fraud - without presenting a skerrick of evidence. What an utterly loathsome human being.

I don’t defend Trump for the simple fact that I don’t view myself as a right winger - or a left winger either. I’m not even sure what a right winger in the US is.

I’ve had this image of a red neck, sexist, monetarist, predominantly Anglo Saxon male which I am sure is not even close to the RW concept.

Maybe I’m centrist or maybe I’m simply undecided. The bottom line is that I have my own opinions which tend to be based on my experiences. If others see that as right wing then so be it.

One thought - where did the terms right and left wing originate? I wonder what they originally meant and how they compare to today’s concept?

Well, I think I'm centrist! We can't both be. Perhaps the centre is nearly infinitely broad, and it's just the narrow margins that are not. Like the untopped edges of a pizza.
Of course I am happy to accept you at your self-valuation. I too vacillate at times between positions often perceived as right and left. One of my primary principles is freedom of conscience, and people on both right and left often try to proscribe that.
The terms right and left-wing date back to the French Revolution. Wiki says: "The political terms Left and Right were used during the 18th century French Revolution to reference the seating arrangement of the Parliament: those who sat to the right of the chair of the presiding officer (le président) were broadly supportive of the institutions of the monarchist Old Regime."
A little later it says: "The people of English-speaking countries did not apply the terms right and left to their own politics until the 20th century. The term right-wing was originally applied to traditional conservatives, monarchists, and reactionaries; an extension, extreme right-wing, denotes fascism, Nazism, and racial supremacy. In Europe, economic conservatives are usually considered liberal, and the Right includes nationalists, idealist, nativist opponents of immigration, religious conservatives, and, historically, a significant number of right-wing movements with anti-capitalist sentiments, including conservatives and fascists, who opposed contemporary capitalism because they believed that selfishness and excessive materialism were inherent in it. In the United States, the Right includes both economic and social conservatives."

[Holden Fourth]

The one thing I am sure of is that I am not a fan of extreme views. Again, it’s how far I lean towards the outer fringes I’m not sure about.