You don't fix a system by destroying it

I've been watching pundits losing their minds trying to parse Trump's second amendment comment today. It's deeply disturbing but It just doesn't matter. He's so far off the reservation as far as respectful political debate goes that this really shouldn't be a surprise. That he would pander to far right gun activists that are too lazy to check their facts on what HC has actually said about her second amendment policy shouldn't be a surprise either.

What still troubles me is the rigged election story he tells. If the US electoral system is broken (and I don't disagree) then it's been broken for many decades. That Trump would try to link these issues to Democratic corruption because things aren't going his way now, when this same system has elected Reagan, GHWB and GWB is hypocritical; flat out ridiculous actually. That rank and file Republicans are buying into this story is a great example of epic cognitive dissonance and groupthink.

Trump's rhetoric is the embodiment of white male entitlement. "If the system doesn't do what I want then it's broken" or "if the system elects a woman it's broken" or "the system that elected a black man must be broken". This is how 4 year olds view the world: "The game is only fun if I win". Instead of promoting the acceptance of living in a political system where you don't always get what you want he's fanning the flames of entitlement. He's crashing and burning but, in a fit of narcissistic selfishness, he wants to make sure he burns the whole house down as he goes. This is classic Trump, always doubling down only this time everyone loses.

Trump's entire campaign is a rejection of the constitutional republic the founding fathers were trying to build. It rejects diversity which is at the very heart of the US constitution. One doesn't need to explicitly protect freedom of speech unless one envisions debate and disagreement. That unpopular speech is protected tells US citizens that all viewpoints and perspectives are meant have the same standing in their society. It's the same for freedom of religion. One does not explicitly protect religion unless they expect differing and conflicting religions to coexist. It's the same message: all religions have the same standing under US law. We welcome all - learn to get along.

Trump's campaign and his followers seem to want something else. Something more free for them and less free for those they don't like. It's the most un-American thing I've ever seen and to watch such an extreme rejection of the constitution play out in mainstream politics is stunning.

He is damaging the US political process in possibly unrepairable ways. Win or lose, the political landscape will never be the same when this is over. He's right that changes are needed but burning it to the ground just because you're not getting what you want isn't a solution. It's a destructive tantrum with a heavy, heavy cost for everyone.

Healthcare in the free market

Healthcare in the free market Before I get into the problems with this video I'd like to point out some (at least partially) successful socially insured services that Americans enjoy: Road/highway maintenance, law enforcement, firefighting services, and schools. And "socially insured" is not a form of governing, like socialism, it's a form of funding insurance. Pundits love to confuse those terms in order to scare people.

So the video is based on a flawed premise; treating healthcare like it should be in the free market. A market is only free if the customer is free to walk away from the product with no consequence (other than that of not having the product). That's how free market prices adjust. If too many people walk away, they lower their prices.
This is not to be confused with their depiction of him having no choice to buy or not to buy. An American resident's taxes pays for roads, law enforcement, and firefighters whether they want them to or not; whether they use them or not. It's done this way because these things are considered pillars of a civil society.

My life is not in danger if I choose not to buy a coffee but healthcare doesn't work like that. In many circumstances I can't walk away from the product which means, in an open (non-regulated) market, vendors can keep prices artificially high because I'll buy it anyway. Sort of like trying to make that coffee choice with a gun pointed at you. You could still choose to walk away but you might be too injured to work or you might even die. Not a lot of freedom in that choice.

The for-profit healthcare industry is why US healthcare costs are in the order of 3x what non-private (socially insured) costs are (Google it) in other 1st world nations. The industry lobbies very hard to stay part of the healthcare equation and the compromises made to keep them in profits is a big part of why the US system is so broken. This despite overwhelming evidence that countries that implement socially insured healthcare do it cheaper and better. No, not perfect, but better in almost every measurable metric.

The healthcare industry works hard to scare people with trigger words like "socialism" or "communism" counting on them to take them at their word and not do their research. I urge my friends living in the States to spend just one hour of your time doing some research for yourself instead of letting media outlets give it to you.

Americans deserve way better for their money than what they're getting. The free market is not the answer to everything. It's good for many things, but not services that the social fabric of a society rely on. Big, profitable industries have shown that they'll throw society under the bus in favour of profits every time.

So, three years and my idea of blogging my thoughts really didn't get off the ground.  No one to blame but myself.  Here's take two.

I've changed the name to apply a bit more focus.  Thinking on Critical is about applying critical thinking to the issues that I see in everyday discussions.  Canada's recent election and now watching the political discourse in the US I'm somewhat stunned at the lack of simple logic, actual facts and critical thinking in the discourse.  I'm disturbed that our political discussions have taken themselves down to the lowest forms of communication.  Our basic ability to think seems to be on critical life support.

Until we decide to raise our expectations for those in our political process real substantive change won't happen.  Until we demand honesty and awareness from our politicians they will continue to give us the simple meaningless soundbites they've been giving us for decades and still get nothing done.

So, I'm going to pick apart political, social and even some personal issues and try to apply some critical thinking and real facts.  Of course, there's no way my own personal biases can be separated from my analysis.  My goal is to be self-aware and up-front about my biases in these discussions.  We'll see what I come up with.

And here it is!  Not even really on its knees yet but, here it is.

Tormented by the many thoughts banging around in my head and inspired by my friend's blog, Polite Company, I've decided to give this blogging thing a try.  I'm not even really sure of what my goal here is yet except to attempt to express some of my thoughts in a cogent enough way that I can be agreed or disagreed with by my peers, friends, random strangers and, of course, trolls.

If I'm to be honest this also exercises the ego a bit doesn't it?  Somewhere inside I have to think that what I'm going to write is worth someone else's time or taking my own time to do this wouldn't make much sense.  Me and a few million other bloggers...

I'm going to be as honest as I can.  At least as honest as I can be without compromising the privacy of those in my life.  I intend to take a critical look at many of the general foundations of our society.  To do that effectively I'll have to examine my own biases and assumptions which I believe need to be constantly challenged if we are to be truly self-aware.  This means that I can guarantee that, at some point, you're probably not going to like what I say.  That's OK.  One of the things I intend to write about is how we seem to have lost the ability to respectfully disagree with one another.  Regardless, I will attempt to be respectful but there are a couple of subjects, specifically religion, where I anticipate a bumpy road.  I'm interested to see what happens when I write something on that subject.

While my computer can hide most spelling mistakes I may make, nothing can hide my shortcomings in the grammar department.  I'm going to have to find a good book on grammar before I get too far down this road I think.  I welcome (beg for) constructive, respectful feedback in this area.

So this is me, pulling out on to this road with no headlights.  Let's see what I crash in to!