Imagination, Hopes, Delusion: Ukraine Invasion

 A war foretold:how the CIA and MI6 got hold of Putin’s Ukraine plans and why nobody believed them (The Guardian) inspired this post with the following:

Few in Ukraine believed a full-scale invasion was likely, but the country’s intelligence agencies had been picking up worrying signs of increasing Russian activity. Ivan Bakanov, the head of the SBU domestic agency, recalled that while Russian spy services had traditionally focused on trying to recruit high-level Ukrainian sources, in the year prior to the invasion “they were going after everyone”, including chauffeurs and low-level functionaries. Often, these pitches were “false flag”: the Russian recruiters would pretend to be from one of Ukraine’s own intelligence agencies.

The SBU also tracked clandestine meetings between officers from Russia’s FSB and Ukrainian civil servants or politicians. These meetings often took place in luxury hotels in Turkey or Egypt, where the Ukrainians travelled under the guise of tourism. Russia hoped these people, motivated variously by ideology, ego or money, would act as a fifth column inside Ukraine when the time came.

“Before I came to the SBU, I also thought we could do a deal with the Russians,” said Bakanov, who was an old business partner of Zelenskyy’s and had no intelligence background when appointed in 2019. “But when you see every day how they are trying to kill and recruit people, you understand that they have a different plan, that they are saying one thing and doing another.”

Still, the prevailing mood in Kyiv was that the US warnings were overegged. Ukraine had been fighting Russian proxy forces in the Donbas for eight years, but the idea of a full-fledged war – with missile attacks, tank columns and a march on Kyiv – seemed unimaginable. 

Similarly, How the Navy Prepared to Fight the Japanese Empire (The Dispatch) with this paragraph:

These strands of learning, arguing, and adapting converged in the Fleet Problems, a series of 21 naval exercises in the 1920s and ’30s that addressed specific concerns or operational expectations. Surface, air, and subsurface vessels all took part, and several incorporated Marine Corps landings as part of the exercise. Fleet Problem XIII included a wildly successful surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, but top Navy officials completely disregarded it because they insisted no enemy would actually be able to achieve that level of surprise and, furthermore, attacking on a Sunday morning was illegal. Overall though, the Fleet Problems provided valuable experience to virtually every senior officer who commanded in World War II and meaningful proficiency in the technologies that shaped the war. 

We are limited by our biases and our experiences (which may overlap) to deal with the future. History is littered with examples.

Ukraine has survived—so far — and America survived December 7, 1941. Survival came not from being prepared in particulars but from preparing for the possibilities. 

 

sch 2/21 

 

American History: Ideology

 With the law, I have no use for originalism. Not in law school and certainly not now has it made sense: the past informs, it is not a prison.

Considering the rampant ignorance of historical knowledge in Americans, it is dangerous. I have a sister who believes this country was set up as a Christian nation. She sent me this link: https://www.facebook.com/share/16XTpKuTji/. I sent her this response:

I sent you the piece about the applicability of Sahria law - this is some BS dreamt up to scare people. But what most people don't understand is that if you weren't from England proper you came here under a different law. Scotland, Germany, France, Switzerland all had a different system of law. The Irish had the Brehon law but I think the English took that from them. Louisiana operates under a different legal system than Indiana. Are we to get to get rid of that state?

People who come here are not slaves anymore. Slaves have to accept what their masters tell them. Free people can say whatever they like. The real question is if their complaints are justified or not? We are not getting Danes and their like here because we do not have a real national health care system. I suppose this fellow would tell anyone complaining about no national health care should be sent back to Denmark.

He repeats that nonsense about this being a Christian country. It was not. We were set up as a country without a national church. Our ancestors knew how vile that institution could be. Especially the Scots who weave in and out of the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention.I was going to suggest googling conventeer but just go here: https://scotland-history.com/the-rise-of-the-covenanters-and-religious-conflict/. I suspect the Livingstons came over here to get away from that. But you can google Thirty Years War.

How does one baptize a nation? Without baptism, there is no remission of sins.  What soul does a nation have? A nation has no more soul than a rock. We are a nation of Christians - and Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, and Muslims. We always have been.

But then the question comes down to what kind of Christian. If only Protestants, then kiss colonial Maryland away. And if you will allow Roman Catholics, why are you a Protestant? Better check out the Northern Ireland Troubles if you want to see what "Christians" can do - in our own time.

Tell this fellow to read Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists. He should also read the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, and his state's Bill of Rights. 

But, assuming this was a Christian country, it is not now. Christians do not turn away the stranger; Christians do not applaud torture and governmental murder; Christians favor feeding the poor. This was the Gospel reading for today:

    MATTHEW 25:31-46

    The Lord said, “When the Son of man comes in his glory and all the holy angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, and he will place the sheep at his right hand, but the goats at the left. Then the king will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.’ Then he will say to those at his left hand, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ Then they also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ Then he will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.’ And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

I do not know why people keep repeating this nonsense. I suppose it's not having stayed awake in their history classes. Or they are too weak-minded to double check what they are being told. I notice he gives nothing to support his blather. That should have told you something right there.

She has not responded.

I want to add Joseph Ellis's  Leadership of the Founder from American Heritage. Ellis is not some wild-eyed fanatic, nor is American Heritage a publisher of flaky ideas.

 Second, they created the first wholly secular state. Before the American founding, it was assumed that state support for an established religion was a mandatory feature of all viable governments, because it enforced a consensus on the common values that made a collective sense of purpose possible. While many of the states retained various Protestant establishments well into the nineteenth century, the founders insisted on a complete separation of church and state at the national level, thereby overturning the long-standing presumption that only shared religious convictions could hold a nation together.

Third, they rejected the conventional wisdom, agreed upon since Aristotle, that political sovereignty was by definition singular and indivisible and must reside in one agreed-upon location. The Constitution defied this assumption by creating multiple and overlapping sources of authority in which the blurring of jurisdiction between federal and state levels, as well as between and among branches of government, became an asset rather than a liability. The very idea of sovereignty became problematic, and its rhetorical depository, “the people,” an inherently elusive location.

Ellis points out the Founders failures and their particular successes—they were human beings who met their moment in history as best they could. It was a white country; their imaginations and nerves failed them to abolish slavery and integrate the former slaves into the citizenry. But they knew their hypocrisy on this point; they knew what they created was not limited to whites.

Peter Cozzens's book review, Being Thomas Jefferson (American Heritage) makes a relevant point:

Any discussion of Jefferson and slavery must consider his relationship with his teenaged slave Sally Hemings, his late wife’s half-sister. Because Jefferson never wrote of her, Burstein is unable to provide any significant insights into what attracted Jefferson to the girl. But he was an ardent pursuer of beauty, so Burstein suggests she was beautiful. He assumes Jefferson felt tenderness toward Hemings but no inclination to elevate her from her subordinate position in the Monticello orbit. Burstein posits that the loss of his wife so devastated Jefferson that he was unwilling to expose himself again to such pain. Rather than remarry, as was customary in Southern society, he took a concubine with whom he could maintain a sexually active life without deep emotional involvement. Burstein summarizes the relationship in the context of Jefferson’s nature thusly:

“I am suggesting that we should reckon with the ‘Saly Hemings story’ as we do with evidence of Jefferson’s personal anxieties as these emerge in all he wrote over the years. He rationalized almost effortlessly. On the basis of his extensive reading and thinking, he was convinced that he knew what was best. He felt morally secure. He doled out advice. He willfully shaped his legacy (or at least tried to), and he managed his little mountain [Monticello] as he saw fit.”

In Jefferson’s feud with Alexander Hamilton over the future of the federal government, which Burstein explores in depth, he delves into the darker side of Jefferson’s psyche. Toward this political rival who orchestrated his removal from the Washington administration, Jefferson felt the deepest “contempt and disgust.” He was unable to recognize any good in an enemy, whom he could only traduce, and against whom he maintained smoldering revulsion. In the political arena, Hamilton “didn’t just frustrate Jefferson. He was the better Machiavellian.”

 If you want originalism, then you need to acknowledge what the Founders knew where they were acting wrongfully.

By stoppering up American life and thought into a sterile past, we ignore how we have risen above our limitations. Therein is the true greatness of America,

 sch 2/21

Indiana Sucked Into The Bible Belt

 My Aunt Mary Ellen said to me decades ago that Indiana was in the Bible Belt. I balked at that idea. It might have been from my friends being anti-church - a couple adamantly so. I had lost interest and faith in the church by the time I was eighteen. Growing up in Anderson, headquarters of The Church of God, may have influenced my opinion. Later, when I was older and heard more of what happened when the Church of God convention came to town - including an increase in local liquor sales, according to one informant.

But all that seems undercut by Where Christian nationalism is most dominant in the U.S. (Axios) We are not there yet.

State of play: Many adherents say the U.S. was founded as the "Promised Land" for white European Christians, and falsely believe the founding fathers sought to create a Christian nation, PRRI president Robert P. Jones tells Axios.

• Critics say Christian nationalism reinforces rigid, male-dominated leadership models in church, home and government, and merges religious identity with white ethnic nationalism.
• It also elevates Christianity — often a specific conservative Protestant expression — above other faiths.

Having dealt with my oldest sister lecturing me on the Constitution and the takeover of this country by Muslims and Spanish speakers without any success, this news leaves me in an even worse mood. It seems Americans were taught their history, and even worse, American Protestants are even more clueless about their history and  their religion.

sch 2/18 

 

Saturday Morning, Trying to Catch Up

I have managed some other posts for the next few days on specific topics; this is my report of the past few days.

2/19:

I spent over 12 hours on a research project for MW. I managed to produce an acceptable draft around 1:30 AM on 2/20.

I talked briefly with CC. I think this was when she began to annoy me. 

There was one submission done: Havik: The Las Positas College Journal of Arts & Literature: “Pieces About A Small Indiana Factory Town, 1976 -1984”.

2/20:

What did I do as soon as I was up? I made edits to the work done on Thursday. Obsession!

 I did the group session, but I want to write a specific post on that. A much-needed haircut and lunch at The Dumpling House before. Afterward, I shopped at Asian Market.

Another call to CC about going to see a movie, texts from her, and another phone call in the afternoon left me annoyed.  I decided I was not only not taking her to a movie but that I needed to just stop bothering. She likes her self-made drama too much, which I think is fueled by her depression. I have also come to realize how much she is like my sister—she prefers being told to learning and dogma to thought. Tiem to just stop trying. I have other things to do.

I managed to get through my email. The highpoint of that was finding out another story, “Ahab in the Moonlight”, had been accepted at the Academy of the Heart and Mind. 

I also got my laundry done!

The appeal from hell is back on track!

I had reasons enough to take a break and celebrate. 

Then I went to see the last showing of “Crime 101,” which I think is a worthy successor to “Heat.” 

2/21 

Morning readings: Blood, Fire and Flamenco: Almodóvar on Almodóvar By Frédéric Strauss (ed.) and Nobody Ever Felt Sorry for Her: The Best of Dorothy Parker (The Literary Review).

Videos:

The West Baden Wonder: Discover Indiana's 'Eighth Wonder of the World', the West Baden Springs Hotel:

 Crane Naval Base has another purpose:

 

 

The story behind « The Magnificent Seven » by The Clash:

 I need to run down to Indy soon, so I will close out here and now.

sch 

Indiana Writers For Today!

 Mirror Indy has a YouTube site including Indiana authors reading their work.

Mossy Feet Books – Author Paul R. Wonning:

Indiana native Author Paul R. Wonning considers himself an “Indiana Hound,” because he “sniffs” out interesting places & history of Indiana and then reveal them to his readers. He also enjoys gardening; US history & dabbles in fiction.

sch 2/18 

 

 

 

The More Things Change, The More They Stay The Same - U.S. Government Surveilling Citizens

Brian James Schill's  I Was a Punk for the FBI (LARB) inspired this post.

Then, with the speed of a Ramones song, it was over—impossibly so in the absence of some coordinated act of sabotage, says Holmstrom. “We just had so many weird problems,” he observes, sounding less paranoid than perspicacious and referencing COINTELPRO, the FBI’s counterintelligence program that targeted putatively seditious groups. “There’s enough red flags that even if we don’t have a smoking gun, there’s evidence.”

*** 

 This, concludes Holmstrom, was ultimately what the state feared most. “They were worried punk would get out of hand like the hippie thing got out of hand,” he says. “I figured, okay, we’re going to pretend to be conservative—just troll everybody.” But it didn’t work, he says. “They still came after us. The Democrats put me out of business, and 10 years later, the Republicans wanted to put me in jail.”

And some things never change.

No, they don't. The moralizers, the improvers of morals, fear anything that might pose a threat to their imposing a stream-lined, regimented world where people behave without any distressful dissent to groupthink.

Meanwhile, headlines like these are proliferating: ICE Wants to Go After Dissenters as well as Immigrants (Brennan Center)

What’s new is that the federal government now openly says it will use its supercharged spy capabilities to target people who oppose ICE’s actions. Labeled as “domestic terrorists” by the administration, these targets include anti-ICE protesters and anyone who allegedly funds them — all of them part of a supposed left-wing conspiracy to violently oppose the president’s agenda.

This serious threat to free speech and privacy rights protected by the First and Fourth Amendments is not hypothetical, as administration officials are making no secret of their intentions.

In September, President Trump issued a memo ordering federal law enforcement to focus on ideologies that are supposedly motivating “domestic terrorism,” including “anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and anti-Christianity; support for the overthrow of the United States Government; extremism on migration, race, and gender,” as well as opposition to “foundational American principles (e.g., support for law enforcement and border control).” The memo also highlights anti-ICE activities.

A democratic government that does not trust its citizens is not a democracy.

 

sch 2/18 

 

Submission, Indy Politics, Rejected

I ran down to Indy, taking a friend and his wife to the airport. On the way back, I went to Payless for groceries. I napped when I got home. 

I got some of my research project done.

The Lascaux Review, Strange Passage, Narrative, Liminal Spaces and Unsolicited Press: “Scenes From An Indiana Factory Town”

 Raleigh Review: “Ahab in the Moonlight”

Ninth Letter: Pieces About A Small Indiana Factory Town, 1976 - 1984 

I quit for the day.  I am not feeling well.

2/18

I was just not well today. All I did was get to the writer's group, but I passed on seeing CC. I got through the email, cleaned the kitchen, and not much else.

A rejection:

Thank you for your submission to Chestnut Review. Although we must decline your submission this time, we appreciated the chance to consider it. Please do not interpret this as a judgment of your art as a whole. Individual tastes matter a great deal in decisions like these, and though we have to decline this round, we encourage you to keep writing and creating. The world needs it, and you.

Thank you, Sheila Kennedy, for pointing me to IndyPolitics.

 Three other posts written and scheduled over the next few days were done, and now I am calling it a day.

sch