Showing posts with label America. Show all posts
Showing posts with label America. Show all posts

BEING AMERICAN IN EUROPE ON THIS VERY DAY: FEBRUARY 28, 2026

Yesterday, as we worked our way through the narrow single-lane streets in the center of our rural French village of 1,800 souls to our parking space near our home, we came upon a work truck slowly inching forward, blocking our way. A work crew walked behind the truck, its open flatbed loaded with hot-mix asphalt, filling small potholes and tamping the fill down with the backs of their shovels. As the truck moved into the last short stub leading to our little plaza, the workers waved to the driver, directing him to back up and turn into a side street, letting us move ahead. I waved and they waved and we went our separate ways.

We had benefited from a small act of kindness. But it was instructive. Our car, an older, freshly-painted bright red Renault station wagon, is certainly recognizable. And we‘ve lived in the village long enough not to be surprised that the workers knew that we lived close by. But the fact is that I didn’t honk our horn or express impatience, that I actually made a calming gesture to the workers with my hands when they first noticed us, clearly indicating that we would have had no trouble waiting an extra minute or two while the truck navigated the final 100 yards or so to our plaza. Instead, the truck backed up and changed its route to save us that extra couple of minutes of time. A small, wholly unnecessary bit of consideration. But not atypical.

After living in France permanently for the past twelve years, I wouldn’t say that we are fully integrated in the highest sense of the word. We are by no means fluent in the language, although we have little trouble being understood and conducting our daily business. Our primary social interactions are confined almost exclusively to folks who speak English, whatever their native tongue might be, although we can and do interact every day with folks with little or no English at all. And although we have secured a 10-year residency card that gives us certain rights in France and throughout Europe that aren’t available to shorter-term visitors, we have no interest in pursuing French citizenship.

But we love living in France. We love the little courtesies that are a part of daily life here, regardless of the universal caricature of the rude Parisian. Our experience is more consistent with the attitude of those village workers who inconvenienced themselves just to save us a negligible amount of time. We say 'Bonjour' to everyone that we walk past on the street in our village, including school kids, whether we know them or not. We wait patiently while Nadine dispenses and gathers news of family and the village at large from behind the counter with every customer of the butcher shop, no matter how long it takes, no matter how many people are waiting for service. (When it’s your turn, you will receive the same level of undivided attention.) The servers at the village bar/brasserie shake our hand or kiss our cheeks when we walk in because we are regulars. They don’t expect a tip because they make a living wage. (But being American, we give an extra little bit that would be considered insultingly small in America but that shows appreciation here. And is indeed appreciated.)

And then the United States joined Israel in bombing Iran.

We are asked for our thoughts as Americans. (I won’t go into the fact that Europeans realize that the definition of America includes the entire hemisphere in which the United States resides. One of the follies that Europeans generously abide is that most folks from the USofA don’t understand that distinction.) For most of us who have settled here, our reaction to current events is a cross between sadness and outrage. Sadness that the good will that most Europeans have felt towards Americans since the end of WWII has been squandered in such a short period of time. Outrage that the country of our birth has become unrecognizable. Men in military gear and wearing masks demanding ‘papers’ from random people on the street? Kidnapping the leaders of other countries? How could this have happened? I won’t pretend to have an answer. Historians may come to a consensus a hundred years from now. But I will venture a few thoughts on the matter.

The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States were written contemporary with and influenced by the writers of the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen. At their core, those documents take as their central tenet that rights are not granted by governments but are inherently human rights which governments must not be allowed to infringe upon.

In the case of the French, within less than a generation, Napoleon was crowned emperor. The First Republic of France thus lasted all of 12 years. (Rights are apparently a fleeting thing. We should all know that by now.) There have been five French Republics in all, responding to the fall of autocrats, the ends of wars, or the influence of major political figures. During the same 250 years, the United States has amended its founding Constitution, primarily to adjust to the inequities that were a given in the late 18th Century, but the US is still working with that same original Constitution as the framework of its first and only republic. Can a document written in the late 18th Century serve as the ultimate legal basis for a 21st Century society? We are learning that it probably cannot.

What caused the breakdown of a social order that seemed to be going so well? I’ll list what I see as a few key factors.

With the exception of Trump, the wealthiest US President in the past 100 years was John Kennedy. And a cornerstone of Kennedy’s economic policy was to lower the tax rates on Americans with incomes over $1,000,000 in the name of economic stimulus. I’m convinced that the failed notion that a rising tide lifts all boats began then. I’m convinced that the inability to find the money to maintain the massive infrastructure that was built on that higher tax rate began then. And I’m convinced that the creation of a class of uber-wealthy Americans with the power to put and keep Donald Trump in office began with that seemingly insignificant bit of wrongheaded economic policy.

The growing power of the 1% also coincides with the politicization of the United States Supreme Court. Only a Court beholden to a perverse political ideology, and unfettered by the ethical guidelines that constrain all other federal courts, could find written into the Constitution that corporations are people and that money equals speech, thus dumping billions of unregulated money into the political process, a result that hardens in concrete the creation of a professional political class concerned with reelection and building personal wealth before serving a constituency. We are seeing the Supreme Court practically daily overturning the carefully wrought rulings of lower federal courts through twists of logic that are best applied to the baking of pretzels.

And finally, at least for this rant, I rue the lack of generally recognized trusted authorities when it comes to speaking truth. There used to be guys named Walter Cronkite and Edward R. Murrow. Cronkite cried on-air when he announced assassination of JFK. He put the Vietnam War on television for all to see. He joined us watching in awe as NASA took men to the moon. Not a saint. No. But at least we could tell that Cronkite believed what he was saying. And we could hear the bombs dropping in the background as Murrow described in real time and in person the stoic determination of an England at war. His reports were both brave and eloquent. Now there are guys like Alex Jones, making a fortune calling the parents of dead school children crisis actors. And there’s the gang at Fox, giving credence to bald-faced lies to further the agenda of their 1% owners.

Just today, I came across deepfake videos on Facebook purporting to be Michael Caine and Steve Martin pushing some voodoo memory-enhancing product. It was so convincingly real that if it hadn’t been so patently absurd, I might have believed it. I’m certain that some did believe it, enough to make the cost of production and distribution of the video more than worthwhile. That I didn’t believe that the videos were really Caine or Martin is a tribute to the fact that my parents were educated and educated me. I wish that more parents valued education, the kind of education that our parents did. Education that rewarded achievement above participation. 

OK. Enough. I feel better now. Thanks for listening.

EXAMINING HEALTHCARE: SEPTEMBER 2018 RANT (ONE DAY LATE)

In a discussion about healthcare, a friend said that the European system was not socialism. Europe was composed of welfare states, of countries whose people wanted something for nothing. So I decided to look at healthcare in both the USofA and Europe to decide which system worked best, both in terms of cost and in terms of outcomes.

I'm not a socialist or a communist. I'm not even a democratic socialist. I do believe that there are certain aspects of daily life that are rightly the domain of government to undertake or, at least, to heavily regulate. I believe that it is clear that for-profit companies generally care more about profit than about the environment, for instance. When air pollution turned the air of cities like Pittsburgh and Los Angeles noxious shades of brown, it took vigorous enforcement of emission standards, not voluntary action on the part of the emitters, to clear the air.

There can certainly be debates about the limits of regulation. I once spoke with a Libertarian candidate for the Pennsylvania State Legislature who posited that all environmental laws should be scrapped. If a business polluted, those affected by the pollution can and should sue, he asserted. For reasons that should be obvious to any thinking person, that position is absurd. Pollution travels. Individuals lack the resources to map sources. Unless we don't care about the air that we breathe, the water that we drink, the food that we eat, we must collectively take responsibility in seeing to that which the Founders described as the General Welfare. In a modern state with hundreds of millions of lives in the balance, that collective responsibility cannot rely on civil litigation. That responsibility is housed in our government. And it is the responsibility of the electorate to empower the government to be both circumspect and scientific in promulgating rules and regulations.

Here's where it gets tricky. Legal scholars have apparently agreed that "...Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness..." in our Declaration of Independence and "...promote the general Welfare..." in our Constitution are not actionable phrases. Certainly not in The Declaration, since that document has no bearing on modern jurisprudence at all. And also not in the preamble to The Constitution, though perhaps some relevance when the phrase is repeated in the body as regards taxation. Indeed, in modern times the Supreme Court leans toward a doctrine that prohibits the consideration of any words that are not actually written into the body of The Constitution. 

Absurd, I say.

Why absurd, you ask?

Because that same SCOTUS believes that corporations are people and that money is speech. Show me where the Founders promoted those ideas anywhere, much less in the body of The Constitution. And of course, there's that nasty little phrase in the Second Amendment about militias. 

So let's consider the Founders' words as regards the true purpose of government. (Bold lettering is mine.)

The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government.” ~Thomas Jefferson

"We ought to consider what is the end of government, before we determine which is the best form. Upon this point all speculative politicians will agree, that the happiness of society is the end of government, as all Divines and moral Philosophers will agree that the happiness of the individual is the end of man. From this principle it will follow, that the form of government which communicates ease, comfort, security, or, in one word, happiness, to the greatest number of persons, and in the greatest degree, is the best." ~John Adams

"The will of the people is the source and the happiness of the people the end of all legitimate government upon earth." ~John Quincy Adams

What can be more important to the happiness of people than their good health? Which form of government best promotes good health? We often hear American elected politicians proclaim that we, that Americans, have the best healthcare in the world. If good health is indeed a prerequisite for happiness, that claim is central to whether or not those same politicians are serving us well. Let's examine that claim.

Americans spend more on healthcare per capita than other developed countries. And the fact that Medicare has been prohibited by Congress from negotiating drug prices adds to the cost. That's right. The largest single purchaser of drugs in the USofA, the federal government, has been prohibited by the government itself from reducing healthcare costs. And so the absurdity begins

And America spends more as a percentage of GDP than other developed countries.


But life expectancy doesn't seem to correlate positively to that spending.

And maternal mortality doesn't seem to correspond positively to that spending.

And infant mortality is, quite frankly, a disgrace.

So is there any metric in which the US shows leadership? Yes. 5-year cancer survival rates.



But then I determined what I believe to be the reason why the US leads in that category. Spending, which of course, in the US relates to profit.

That's one heck of a difference.

There are those who might suggest that the lack of spending in other countries at end of life is due to rationing. But no one that I know in Europe has experienced a denial of service because of age. I have more than one friend older than 70, one older than 80, who received full treatment for cancers on the government dime with no questions asked. My take on it is that the difference is a quality of life issue. Europeans just think differently about how to live their lives than Americans do. It's why they insist on longer vacations and take full advantage of their vacation time. It's why they close businesses to vacation with their families even at the height of tourist season because that's when their kids are out of school. And I suspect it's why they don't demand invasive and costly procedures at the end of life.

So, call the countries of Europe and those with similar healthcare systems Welfare States. They don't care. They pay for that welfare through taxation and, on the whole, they are happy to do so. 

My nurse sister-in-law described a conversation about single-payer healthcare that she had with a colleague, a colleague with a Ph.D. "But I believe in capitalism," said the colleague. What does an economic system have to do with healthcare outcomes? Apparently, the impact is almost entirely negative.

Absurd.






AN AMERICAN EXPAT'S TAKE ON WORLD POLITICS: PART 3 - TRUMP

When talk about politics among English-speaking expats here in the south of France turns to the USofA, two questions are inevitably asked.

1. How did Donald Trump manage to get himself elected President of the United States?
This is a technical question, asked by those who are aware that Clinton received 3,000,000 more votes than Trump.

2. How did Donald Trump manage to get himself elected President of the United States?
This is a philosophical question, asked by those who do not understand the current body politic in the United States or, for that matter, in much of the modern world.

Let's take these questions one at a time.

THE MECHANICS OF AMERICAN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS
A quick rehash of the fact that American Presidential elections are fought state by state is in order. The coastal American states are relatively few but with highly concentrated populations. The interior states are less populated but are more numerous. While Clinton racked up big wins on the two coasts, Trump nearly swept the interior. So, in simple terms, although Clinton won the popular vote, Trump won the vote in a majority of the states and therefore the Presidency.

BUT HOW DID IT HAPPEN? REALLY?
I've struggled mightily with this question. I have come to a simple, five-part answer:
Racism
Misogyny
Fear
Denial
Self-Deception

I have no explanation for the existence of racism, misogyny, or the fear that goes with them. I suspect that they are the result of manipulation by those seeking power in order that they may rule us by dividing us. I will not spend more time on that except to say that persons who exhibited those traits made up the core of Trump's base. Such seems to be the way with many Western populists.

Denial and self-deception are more interesting to me because they provide the basis for otherwise rational people to make irrational choices. And in the end, that's who elected Trump, otherwise rational people making an irrational choice. No, there were not enough racists to elect a President in the US, nor enough misogynists. But when you add those in denial, those blithely turning a blind eye, Trump becomes possible.

Denial and self-deception also explain why Trump is still revered by some. Take the budget recently passed by the American Congress. That budget includes both deep tax cuts and increased spending that combined will surely result in huge deficits. Republicans no longer even pretend differently. Yet political conservatives by and large welcome Trump with open arms. The only way that a conservative can approve of such financial brinkmanship is to jettison the policy cornerstones to which fiscal conservatives have adhered for decades. Speaker of the House of Representatives Paul Ryan must either be in denial that he ever held those principles in the first place or be deceiving himself into believing that they never mattered. I don't know Ryan. I can't say which explanation is true. But he's on record. He used to be a fiscal conservative. No other explanation for him applauding the current budget than denial and/or self-deception is possible.

Here's an example from a different but relevant conversation that has been raging online recently. How will we address gun violence in America? A picture of the black actor Samuel L. Jackson is circulating on social media accompanied by the following quote: "I grew up in the south with guns everywhere and we never shot anyone." (I've been on his site. It is apparently a valid quote.) A Southern black man who grew up during the civil rights struggle in the American South somehow fails to mention that, while he may never have shot anyone, or his friends may never have shot anyone, Emmitt Till is dead and Medgar Evers is dead and Michael Schwerner is dead and Andrew Goodman is dead and James Chaney is dead and Martin Luther King, Jr. is dead. And more. In the South. Through gun violence. The irony is stunning. The only way that a man like Jackson can own such a quote is to be so deep in denial as to be immune to reason.

Thus, Trump. There is no way to soften it. I cannot find a path to civility or, for that matter, forgiveness. I have listened closely to my American friends rationalize the circumstances that led to Trump's election. I understand the battle between Sanders and Clinton in the Democrat Party primaries took its toll. I understand that bots backed by big dollars and/or foreign governments messed with social media. But in the end, people voted. And the reason that they voted for Trump boils down to those five, simple reasons. Hard to swallow. Harder to deny.
Racism
Misogyny
Fear
Denial
Self-Deception

Read more of my political musings HERE. I'll wrap these musings up with a fourth in the series presently.




WHAT'S WITH DONALD TRUMP?

When we are visiting with friends here in the south of France, sipping pink and munching aperos, the question is inevitably asked. What's with you people and Donald Trump? We are, after all, the Americans in the room. As such, we are the de facto experts on the wacky world of American Presidential politics. Do you want truth, we reply? Are you ready for the truth? Can you handle the truth?

OK. Pay attention. There will be a quiz.

The Trumping of the Republican Party is primarily the result of two American political events.

The first was the election of Ronald Reagan. You remember Reagan? Trees cause more pollution than automobiles? Ketchup is a vegetable? Those may sound silly to you today but Reagan was The Great Communicator. The disconnect between rhetoric and reality became irrelevant.

I repeat in case you missed it. In American politics, the disconnect between rhetoric and reality is irrelevant.

Thus, Reagan was able to preside over a huge increase in federal spending, a huge increase in federal debt, and still claim that Big Government was the problem and that tax cuts would balance the budget. Thus, Trump could say that he would build a wall on the Mexican border, that the Mexicans would pay for it, and nobody in his audience laughed.

The second political event leading to the Trumping of the Republicans was the election of that Kenyan-born Muslim, Barack Obama. Obama's election confronted a vast swath of Americans with the shocking truth that being born with white skin, having a closet full of rifles, and holding a world view that failed to consider anything happening beyond your own little cul-de-sac was not going to cut it any more. And it was Obama's fault - Obama and everyone who looked like him.

That the next refugee allowed on our shores might grow up to be President was no longer a point of American pride. The next refugee was probably not going to be white.

Yes, folks. Trump represents the worst of America. And in a primary election in the United States, winners are decided by those voters that show up. Since only the most rabid, highly motivated voters tend to show up in the primaries, the winners are the ones willing to feed the beast.

Beware. The fringe right wing of politics with which Europe is so familiar and against which Europe is constantly on guard has invaded America with a vengeance. I have decided to leave the United States and live in France for a reason. And it's not about the wine and the cheese.

Well, not just about the wine and the cheese...








FRANCE: STUFF YOU MIGHT NOT FIND IN THE HANDBOOKS

There's the stuff that you know. There's stuff that you don't know. There's stuff that you know that you don't know. And...