To the Editor:
Having blogged often about the Russian mafiocracy’s expert use of troll (or bot) farming techniques, I was surprised to happen upon an entry in the Gazette’s May 14 edition’s this-day-in-history section. Under the heading “Tuesday, May 21” for 2016 it noted that, “In Houston, hundreds rally to support Islam. Hundreds more rally, armed, to oppose it. All have been duped by a Russian troll farm.”
A quick search revealed many accounts of the incident.
How on Earth did I miss that? I thought I was on top of all the nefarious activities of the Russian trolls to get us to believe whatever they want us to believe!
The Houston incident illustrates an important point about the modus operandi of Yevgeny Prigozhin’s successors in utterly forming and controlling the public debate about culture and politics in the West: they provoke both sides.
There is no more left vs. right, liberal vs. conservative, Democrat vs. Republican. Replacing those dichotomies is the one invented by the (allegedy!) late Prigozhin and carried on by his heirs. It consists of two cults that were created using gobbelsology techniques to maximize the potential of civil war.
Uncovering just one little snippet of evidence among thousands, recall that BP (before Prigozhin) the debate about abortion centered on questions such as “when does life begin” and “how do we quantify the level of threat to mother and fetus from different pregnancy anomalies?”
The St. Petersburg team found in that debate exactly the kind of fodder that, with a little social media trolling and provocation, could be turned into a flaming war. Now of course one must be either vehemently “pro-life” or “pro-right-to-choose.” To say it’s a complex issue with no easy answers would be like a Connecticut resident saying “both the Sox and the Yankees have their plusses and minuses… .”
Using the same playbook but this time just for sport, the pregozhia amused themselves by creating a flame war between those who are intimidated by science and those who are not. I imagined how that one was concocted in a Russian bar in this script for a very short play:
“Yuri, that is half liter of vodka speaking. You are full of it.”
“Evgeny, I tell you I can do it.”
“OK, Yuri, let us make interesting. I bet you hundred thousand rubles, even money.”
“Evgeny, you are on.”
“Good. You shall see… Um… what was it again I am going to get them to believe? (You are right, I am drunk.)”
“(sigh) You were going to get ten thousand Americans to believe world is flat.”
“Da. That. I start tomorrow. Get ready to pay, Evgeny.”
“Yuri. Please. Americans not that gullible. You get ready to pay.”
Wes Kussmaul
New Castle, N.H.
Wes:
We’re always happy to hear someone has found page eight of interest. While we have no doubt as to the Rooskies’ evil intentions towards us, or their history of using our social media addictions against us, we’d dispute your contention that Prigozhin and his successors have displaced our own native animosities. Read a few newspapers published during John Adams’ administration—those roots run deep!
The Editor
–=≈=–
Focus on the Working Class
To the editor;
The past several weeks have produced a series of remarkable events in the runup to the 2024 presidential election. A cluster of court decisions virtually assured that Trump would not be prosecuted for crimes committed during his presidency before the November election. Then came the incomprehensible Supreme Court decision that granted him immunity from prosecution for a wide range of presidential actions which called into question whether Trump could be put on trial at all. Biden’s disastrous debate caused many to ask whether he could effectively complete another term. These events seemed to ensure that Trump was on a glidepath to reelection. Even the attempted assassination had the effect of making Trump an iconic hero to the far right. Prospects for the Democrats looked dim and a fractious debate among the Democratic elite regarding whether Joe Biden should remain the presidential candidate appeared to further jeopardize their election chances. Then, like a plotline from a B movie, Biden’s dramatic decision to withdraw from the election and his endorsement of Kamala Harris changed everything. Democrats were re-invigorated and Republican strategists were befuddled. Surprisingly, the presidential race was competitive once again.
The Dems should be excited about the opportunity presented by the selection of Harris but should not be deceived that the current euphoria will guarantee her election. The U.S. electorate has polarized into two large, loyal blocs. MAGA Republicans comprise one bloc and Democratic Progressives the other. In a democracy, political factions should be motivated by the search for a common good and engage in respectful bargaining with those of different views. This norm has been discarded by both voting blocs, each seeking to impose their will on the other. Each bloc is united in sectarian solidarity that will ensure unwavering support for their Party’s candidate in 2024. Although the Progressive base is more fragmented than MAGA around various identity issues (especially Israel’s conduct of the war in Gaza), the selection of Harris is likely to solidify their support. The bottom line is that the nomination of Harris will motivate both bases but neither base is sufficient to elect a president in a national election. Reliable red states are likely to remain red and reliable blue states remain blue, leaving the election to be decided by independent or non-aligned voters from the battleground states.
If Harris is to win, Democrats must devise a campaign that will attract independents. The independent voter is issue oriented. They vote on items that directly affect them or their families rather than on ideology or emotion. Independents also tend to be younger and more moderate than members of established parties, disliking the extremism of both parties. Recent polls indicate that the primary issue for this group is economic, especially inflations and its effect on their buying power. To win the independents, Democrats must devise a campaign strategy that demonstrates understanding of their issues and empathy for their plight as well as specifying how they will solve their problems (especially economic concerns).
In the elation following the Harris nomination, some Progressives suggested that the campaign was now focused on race and gender. Identitarian ideology contributed to Hillary Clinton’s loss in 2016. A focus on these issues is not likely to bring Harris a victory in 2024. Working class voters are suffering. The independents in this group seek elected officials that will pay attention to their economic plight, not fight culture wars. Democrats should let Trump and Vance spew misogynistic and sexist comments and concentrate on how to raise up middle and working-class Americans.
Robert D. Russell, Ph.D.
Harrisburg, Pa.
Robert:
Would that the Clintons had done as you suggest….
The Editor
–=≈=–
Cui Bono?
Dear Editor:
NPR interviewed a former Democrat (man) who switched away from the party on the grounds of inflation, transgender school athletes, immigrants at our border with Mexico. He’s going to keep up his “Let’s Go Brandon” yard sign.
Inflation—we may feel effects of COVID limiting supply lines for longer than we’d like. And when do businesses / corporations ask for less when they can command more?
Trans students in school athletic games—allow a new “norm” to happen—these are games. When has musculature ever been evenly spread?
Immigrants—around the planet war-persecution and climate-disasters create refugees. These families at our border are our Western hemisphere refugees.
Kamala Harris made a strong statement of caring for the suffering of the Gazan people while Israel under Netanyahu decimates a population that is not military. Remember when Pres. George H.W. Bush had a brief war with Iraq, deliberately out in the desert because urban war (that his son later ran) would inhumanely destroy civilians and their lives, in Baghdad? That higher standard of behavior was disregarded by his son and is worlds better than Netanyahu’s so-low behavior now. Not that war is ever the “brightest-bulb” solution. War is cruelly best for munitions-makers’ profits.
Lynn Rudmin Chong
Sanbornton, N.H.
Lynn:
We blame that hotbed of rivalry, violence, and patriotism known as the Pentagon-Football complex. Why jack up naturally-occuring levels of tribalism? The better to divide and conquer. That time-honored method isn’t just for conquering neighbors. It’s probably most often used by rulers to control their subjects. American citizens, for example.
What dividing line is most vulnerable? The color line. Again, maybe we’re just paranoid, but it seems to us that one reason for racism’s persistence is its usefulness to those at the top of the food chain. As Lyndon B. Johnson said, “If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you.”
As for those munition-makers, you have to admit, they’ve got a perfect product. Talk about “planned obsolescence”—their products are designed to destroy themselves!
The Editor
–=≈=–
It’s Who He Is
Dear Editor:
The most important and vital aspect of maintaining a democracy is the ability for citizens to vote in fair and open elections. In a frightening speech to Christians in Florida last week Donald Trump stated, “Get out and vote. Just this time. You won’t have to do it anymore… Get out, you’ve got to get out and vote. In four years, you don’t have to vote again, we’ll have it fixed so good you’re not going to have to vote.”
Donald Trump is actually telling people that if you vote for him and he is reelected, voting will be eliminated in four years. He is going to “fix” the country so that we will have a dictator in charge and voting will just be an obsolete memory of our former democratic republic.
These comments by Trump should alone disqualify him from being president. It is amazing to think that people would actually use their democratic right to vote to vote for a man who is telling them that this vote will be the last time they will need to vote. Imagine all those who fought and died to preserve and protect our precious right to vote having their sacrifices and service so grossly disparaged by a man who called them “losers and suckers” and took every means possible to avoid military service.
Trump has already stated that he will be a dictator “on day one,” now he is telling us that after day one you will never need to vote again. As Maya Angelou said, “when someone tells you who they are, believe them.” Donald Trump has clearly told us who he is, and we better believe him.
Rich DiPentima
Portsmouth, N.H.
Rich:
It was bad enough the first time around, worrying about what would happen if a puffed-up con man somehow finagled his way into the Oval Office. That turned out worse than anyone could have imagined. Who had “Trump presides over the hanging of his own Vice President” on his Bingo card? Yet somehow here we are again—and it looks like it could be decided by a few thousand votes in a handful of states. The nation deserves a ruler across the knuckles from a mean schoolmarm.
Call us vicious, call us cruel, but the Sweetheart of the Newsroom these days is the old, white-haired Scottish woman in a YouTube video who, interviewed on the day of Margaret Thatcher’s funeral, said, “I’d put a stake through her heart, and garlic ’round her neck, to make sure she never comes back.”
The Editor
–=≈=–
Harris Terrifies Ewing
To the Editor:
Democrat [sic] Party elites rejected 14 million primary voters and themselves installed VP Kamala Harris as the Democrat Party Presidential Candidate.
[We deleted the rest of Don’s letter, some 268 words, because, like the sentence above, it was all either untrue, or misleading. – The Ed.]
Don Ewing
Meredith, N.H.
Don:
You—a stalwart of the party whose members have been videotaped groveling before a gold-plated idol representing an ignorant, racist, bankrupt goon—have the gall to question the procedures of a political party the name of which you cannot properly spell? Right. Let’s move on.
Why are Americans pissed about the economy? Because the corporations that back Republicans have jacked up their profits behind the screen of inflation, the better to afford yachts the size of naval destroyers. Your claims about crime are, as usual, utter BS. You’re lying about Harris’ proposals, which is to say, you’re running true to form. Your connection to reality is as tenuous as that of your gibbering champion.
The Editor
–=≈=–
Let’s Take a Look At The Other Old Guy
To the Editor:
Biden did such a poor job at the June 27th debate that few remarked on Trump’s incredibly poor showing. Now that Biden is out of the race, it’s time to take a closer look.
I watched the whole debate. OK, I’m a masochist. I do not remember Trump actually answering any questions that were posed. He deflected every question with an answer about the border! Numerous times the hosts pointed out that he hadn’t answered what they asked. He still couldn’t answer. Besides that, fact checkers indicated that he lied 30+ times.
It really isn’t hard to prepare for a debate when you don’t answer the questions or just lie about everything!
Now Trump has pulled out of the scheduled debate in September with the less-than-compelling excuse that “the Democrats don’t really know who their candidate will be.” Yes they do! It’s Harris. She already has more than enough convention delegates pledged to her to win. She has $ Millions pouring in and is on the campaign trail.
Trump knows in a debate with Harris he can’t get away with simply deflecting and lying. After all, she is a prosecutor used to dealing with felons.
The country needs to see this debate.
Michael Frandzel
Portsmouth, N.H.
Michael:
Hear hear. Republicans love to cite the Founding Fathers as role models. We’d love to see what George Washington might have to say about Trump running away from a black woman.
The Editor
–=≈=–
Who Needs a Surrenderer-in-Chief?
To the Editor:
Donald has said multiple times he could end the war in Ukraine in a day. Why hasn’t he done so? How would he do it? Russia is clearly not going to surrender or withdraw. He must be planning to force Ukraine to give up all the territory Russia has taken.
Just as Trump surrendered Afghanistan to the Taliban, he wants to surrender Ukraine to Russia. What will be next, surrendering Europe to Russia and Taiwan to China?
This November do not put the Surrenderer-in-Chief in charge of this country.
Walter Hamilton
Portsmouth, N.H.
Walter:
You know what this country really needs? A former president surrendering to whoever Kamela Harris appoints to be Attorney General.
The Editor
–=≈=–
Sanctioning Israel
To the Editor:
The UN may be gearing up to place sanctions on Israel, as the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled that the Occupation is illegal (let alone deadly) and that Israel must exit Palestine, including Israeli settlements. How will the U.S.A. react to that? Meanwhile, China has brought the various Palestinian factions to the bargaining table so they now stand united. Can the U.S.A. handle a Free Palestine, free of Israeli and American interference? Or will we continue to support Israel’s caging of Palestinians behind checkpoints, in military prisons, and within closed borders as well as their daily massacres in Gaza?
As the Pope stated during the Christmas blockade and bombings, Israel is the terrorist. And frankly, America is too for funding the illegal Occupation and Gaza genocide. Our behavior towards Palestine is not what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they declared all are created equal. By supporting Israeli aggression, we are straying dangerously away from our founding principles and George Washington’s admonishment to avoid foreign entanglements.
Genevieve Harris-Fraser
Orange, Mass.
Genevieve:
It’s shocking to think of the U.S. as a terrorist regime, and yet, if the combat boot fits… .
The Editor
–=≈=–
Netanyahu’s Outrageous Hypocrisy
Dear Editor,
After the Hezbollah attack on the soccer field in Israel’s Golan Heights, Israel released a statement saying, “We will not tolerate harm to civilians.” (PBS, July 30, 2024)
This is outrageous hypocrisy given the fact Netanyahu’s war policy in Gaza has been to drop dumb bombs on civilian buildings there.
Israel lost 12 young civilians in that recent Golan attack, but Israel’s far-right government wants the world to overlook the 12,000 or more children whose lives have been sacrificed by Mr. Netanyahu in Gaza.
Meanwhile, American politicians continue to spew out the knee-jerk slogan, “Israel has a right to defend itself.” No, silly people, Israel does not have the right to take over 20 civilian lives in Gaza as restitution for each and every Jewish civilian life taken on October 7th. This is not a tooth for a tooth, an eye for an eye, or a life for a life that Israel’s own Hebrew Bible says is the proportional restitution standard for evil.
Is there a politician anywhere in Washington D.C. or in Tel Aviv who has an actual human conscience or respects the Bible today?
Kimball Shinkoskey
Woods Cross, Utah
Kimball:
We’re not particularly worried about what the Bible says. For example, we’d have no qualms about wearing a garment made of a mixture of linen and wool. It is clear, though, that Israel is acting in complete disregard to the laws of warfare, and brazenly lying about it every day.
The Editor
–=≈=–
Don Old Grump, Champion Hypocrite
Dear Editor,
During the National Association of Black Journalists’ interview of The Former Guy, the criminal candidate’s complaining accusations against immigrants became wilder, weirder, and more exaggerated. We could see him making up more and more ominous lies as his hands played an invisible accordion. The fact that crime statistics for immigrants are far lower than for the general population didn’t retard his fire-hose of lies.
But one fact should be repeated, over and over, until the public fully realizes how cynical and destructive the whining Grump’s mendacity is. A bi-partisan bill to allocate more resources to our borders—for both enforcement and for more judges to determine whose claims for asylum are valid—had passed the Senate and was scheduled to pass the House of Representatives. Then Don Old Grump told his Republicans to kill the bill because he didn’t want the problem solved while Biden was President.
Bruce Joffe
Piedmont, Calif.
Bruce:
At least Dolt #45 made puerile ad hominem attacks fun again. We’re stealing your “Don Old Grump.”
The Editor
–=≈=–
Dear Compatriots…
To the Editor:
The events are coming fast and furious on the world stage… where to begin?
Well, I will begin and end with one event: the attempted assassination of one of the U.S. presidential candidates in mid-July. This has led to a number of opinion pieces: was former President Trump truly shot, or grazed, or hit by bullet shrapnel? Is there no alternative to covering the wound in the world of modern bandagery besides a white pad stuck to the side of the head? Is the sight of convention attendees sporting their own versions of white ear bandages weird or heart-warming? How many seconds before the assassin aimed his weapon was that person spotted? Who was responsible for security at the rally? Motives?? Maybe ban outdoor rallies? Maybe ban roofs near rallies? As often happens, people in charge of security have been “hauled up” before the congressional committee to do some explaining.
However, there’s little comment about the urgent necessity for people to purchase, own, and march around with long-range assault rifles. Because, you know, the Second Amendment. We are assured that even though the Founding Fathers had no knowledge of such weaponry, they definitely wanted such things to be freely and zealously marketed.
It’s all perfectly normal business as usual, right?
Alas,
Beth McCarthy
Tamworth N.H.
Beth:
Oh, it’s normal all right. Normal, though, is context-dependent.
In Dodge City, Kansas and Tombstone, Arizona, back in the 1880s, normal meant handing over your six-shooters to the marshal upon entering town.
Over the past century and a half, due to sophisticated lawyering, improved manufacturing techniques, and the evolution of capitalism, now every citizen is on his or her best behavior, because there is scarcely anyplace left in the country where you won’t be under the benign protection of some random fellow citizen packing heat.
The Editor
–=≈=–
How to Solve Our Supreme Problem
Sir or Madam,
It dawned on me shortly after the former president had his way stacking the Supreme Court his way, as the radio announcer declared the Court was now a republican court. This wasn’t news; I’d learned many years ago how the three branches of government could be, indeed are, motivated, ruled, by the party majority of its members… . But the last time I checked, the Statue of Justice wore a blindfold, because justice is supposed to be blind, not republican or democrat.
I feel it’s time for a change (and we’ll talk about the un-democratic Electoral College another time) and submit that the court should not be selected by the president, whatever party he or she is a member of. In fact, I even believe the court should be completely anonymous, unknown to us, and elected for a six- or eight-month session, by lottery (or other means), of perhaps graduate law students or other professionals. Their politics should be unknown. They should serve much as a Grand Jury serves, and be released at the end of their term, a new ‘jury’ selected for the next session.
We have had trial and criminal cases of all kinds and types, including capital, forever, with those rulings being decided by ‘a jury of one’s peers.’ Yes, life or death issues, decided by common folks released from their service at trial’s end. Why would this not work at the Supreme level?
Anthony Prizio
Windham, Maine
Anthony:
The Supreme Court, as it is, presents problems so grave that we welcome any suggestions for its improvement. It’s not that we think anything in these pages is ever likely to effect any changes to that august body. It’s just that we’d like like to hear more discussion of this crucial problem, while it’s still legal for such discussions to be held.
The Editor
–=≈=–
This Time We Can Believe Him
To the Editor,
Donald Trump’s message to Christians urging them to “vote for the last time,” thus announcing his intention, if elected, to eliminate elections and “reign” for life, was strange and unusual in more ways than one. Not only because no other American politician has ever made that proposal in the history of our democracy, but also because this consummate liar was for once telling the truth.
We can believe him this time. A vote for the Republican candidate for the presidency of our democracy is a vote for autocracy—a system of government by one person with absolute power. Would you want Donald Trump (or any other person) to take away your freedom and have absolute power over your life?
Cynthia Muse
Rye, N.H.
Cynthia:
That’s a hard “No.”
The Editor
–=≈=–
Recent Item of “Other Correspondence”
A woman driving a pickup truck, while turning from Middle onto State Street at about 1:50 p.m. on Saturday, July 27th, volubly yelled the following question at our Wandering Photographer:
“What the f___ is up with this? Elon Musk gets more sex than me.”
We are unable to provide a definitive answer to this question. Our best guess is that it must be the money. – The Ed.