Category: Politics

Posted on

Lessons from Lisbon, Madrid and Madison Square Garden

What Makes a Civilization Great?

What the Knicks and the Iberian Peninsula Teach About Greatness

As I watched the New York Knicks march toward a championship, I found myself thinking less about basketball and more about history.
Championships are often explained through the mythology of the superstar. We celebrate the dominant scorer, the transcendent athlete, the singular genius who carries everyone else to glory.
Yet the Knicks offered a different lesson.
Jalen Brunson was unquestionably their leader, but this was not a one-man team. Their success depended on relationships forged years earlier at Villanova. These were players who trusted one another instinctively, who understood where teammates would be before they arrived, and who were willing to sacrifice statistics, shots, and even money for a larger goal.
Brunson famously left substantial money on the table to help the organization assemble a deeper roster. In a professional sports world often defined by maximizing individual gain, he chose collective success.
The result was not merely a winning team. It was a cooperative enterprise. And history suggests that great civilizations are built the exact same way.

The Chemistry of Convivencia

During our recent trip through Spain and Portugal, I was struck by how often the story of Iberian greatness was actually a story of collaboration among very different peoples.
Long before the Inquisition, the Iberian Peninsula became the world’s vibrant center of learning. This didn’t happen because one culture triumphed over another, but because multiple cultures interacted in a unique ecosystem of coexistence, or Convivencia.

  • Romans contributed law, infrastructure, and language.
  • Muslim scholars brought radical advances in mathematics, navigation, and agriculture while preserving Greek philosophy.
  • Christian kingdoms eventually provided the political framework that inherited this vast reservoir of knowledge.
    But it was the region’s Jewish scholars and statesmen who often served as the vital connective tissue—the ultimate “glue guys” of the Mediterranean world—functioning as the translators, diplomats, scientists, and financial administrators who made the system run.

Hasdai ibn Shaprut (c. 915–970): The Ultimate Catalyst In the Golden Age of Córdoba, Ibn Shaprut served as a physician, translator, and foreign minister to the Caliph. He utilized his multi-linguistic mastery to translate the famous medical texts of Dioscorides into Arabic, establishing Iberia as Europe’s medical capital. As a diplomat, he negotiated complex alliances between Muslim rulers and Christian monarchs, proving that intellectual and political synthesis was the true engine of Iberian prosperity.

The Knowledge Enablers

When we look closer at the Golden Age of Spain and Portugal, the intellectual peaks were achieved not through isolation, but through an intentional exchange of ideas.
Consider Moses Maimonides (1138–1204), born in Córdoba. While globally revered as a towering rabbi and philosopher, Maimonides was also a brilliant physician who wrote extensively on hygiene, pharmacology, and psychology. His philosophical masterpiece, The Guide for the Perplexed, sought to harmonize Aristotelian science with divine revelation. His works were eagerly read not just by Jews, but by Christian thinkers like Thomas Aquinas and Muslim scholars alike, fueling the intellectual fire of the entire continent.
This collaboration yielded practical, world-changing technology. The famous translation schools of Toledo transformed Europe by turning ancient Greek and Arabic texts into Latin. Suddenly, Aristotle, Galen, and Ptolemy were available to a continent hungry for knowledge.
When it came to the Age of Exploration, Portugal’s maritime empire was literally guided by Jewish science:

[Jewish & Islamic Astronomical Data] 
               │
               ▼
   [The Perpetual Almanac] (Abraham Zacuto)
               │
               ▼
[Advanced Cartography & Astrolabes]
               │
               ▼
  [Global Maritime Exploration]

The legendary astronomer and mathematician Abraham Zacuto (1452–1515) revolutionized navigation. His life’s work, The Perpetual Almanac, alongside his improvements to the copper astrolabe, allowed sailors to determine their latitude at sea using the sun rather than the stars.
Without Zacuto’s calculations and personal consultations, there might have been no Vasco da Gama reaching India, no Pedro Álvares Cabral reaching Brazil, and no Portuguese trading empire stretching from Africa to Asia.
The remarkable achievements of Spain and Portugal were not products of isolation. They were products of connection.

The Cost of Exclusion

Yet history also reveals how fragile such success can be. Beginning in the late fifteenth century, Spain and Portugal gradually abandoned the very conditions that had fueled their rise.
The expulsion of the Jews in 1492 systematically removed the most educated, skilled, and commercially connected citizens from the peninsula. Abraham Zacuto himself was forced to flee to Lisbon, and later Tunis, taking his brilliant mind away from the Iberian sphere.
This purge of human capital soon stretched from the cities to the fields. In the 1520s, the Spanish Crown banned Islam entirely, forcing the remaining Moorish population to convert or flee. These Morisco communities comprised the foundational backbone of Spain’s agricultural sector. For generations, they had engineered and maintained highly sophisticated, intricate systems of irrigation, terracing, and water management that kept the arid landscapes of Valencia and Andalusia incredibly fertile.
When this specialized expertise was systematically uprooted and driven out, the consequences were immediate and devastating. The complex canal networks fell into disrepair, agricultural productivity plummeted, and once-abundant yields dropped dramatically. Spain quickly found that you cannot exile your primary food producers without paying a severe price; as the agricultural infrastructure collapsed, localized famines began to creep across the countryside.

[Forced Conversion/Exile of Moorish Peasantry (1520s)]
                         │
                         ▼
      [Collapse of Sophisticated Irrigation Networks]
                         │
                         ▼
           [Severe Drop in Agricultural Yields]
                         │
                         ▼
             [Creeping Famine and Depopulation]

At the exact same time, enormous quantities of silver were flowing into Spain and Portugal from the Americas. Instead of stimulating innovation, this easy wealth reduced incentives to develop domestic industry or rebuild the shattered farming sector. The broad lesson remains: easy wealth can quickly become a substitute for creativity.
Meanwhile, nations such as the Netherlands and Great Britain adopted the exact playbook that had once made Iberia successful. They welcomed displaced Jewish merchants and skilled laborers, encouraged innovation, expanded scientific inquiry, and developed institutions that rewarded enterprise.
Leadership shifted. The world’s center of gravity moved northward.

The Contemporary Question

History does not repeat itself exactly, but it often rhymes.
Today, the United States remains the most innovative nation on earth. Our universities attract talented students from every continent. Our laboratories lead scientific discovery. Our entrepreneurs continue to create technologies that reshape the world.
But these strengths depend on openness.
Scientific progress thrives on collaboration. Medical breakthroughs emerge from international networks of researchers. Innovation accelerates when people with different experiences, perspectives, and skills work together toward common goals.
When nations become fearful of outsiders, suspicious of rigorous inquiry, or hostile to global intellectual exchange, they risk weakening the very forces that created their success.
The lesson of the Knicks is surprisingly similar to the lesson of pre-Inquisition Iberia. Greatness is rarely the product of a single star, or a single insular culture.
Whether in basketball, science, business, or civilization itself, success emerges from cooperation. The most successful teams are not always the ones with the highest raw talent; they are the ones that best combine talent, trust, shared purpose, and a willingness to sacrifice individual advantage for collective achievement.
Civilizations are no different.
The question facing every great nation is whether it will continue attracting talent, embracing knowledge, and building institutions that encourage cooperation—or whether it will retreat into exclusion and self-congratulation.
The Knicks answered that question on the basketball court. History answered it centuries ago.
The question now is whether we are paying attention.

Posted on

Liberty, Land Deals, and the Lost Colony of Vandalia:

How Real Estate Speculation Helped Spark the American Revolution

Everyone learns the American Revolution was about liberty, rights, Enlightenment ideals, and maybe some cranky guys in Boston who took their tea way too seriously.

But there’s another story (highlighted in Ken Burns documentary on the Revolutionary War) — the property story — where the Revolution looks less like a philosophical uprising and more like a group of wealthy Virginians who believed deeply in freedom, self-determination, and their God-given right to buy land west of the Appalachians and flip it for profit.

This is that story.

The story of land, liberty… and one spectacularly failed frontier real-estate venture called Vandalia.

⸻

1. Before They Were Founders, They Were the Original Real Estate Syndicate

The Virginia gentry of the 1760s weren’t just planting tobacco and writing political pamphlets.

They were busy accumulating land like it was a colonial version of Monopoly.

The roster of early-American real estate titans included:

George Washington

If Washington were alive today, he’d be on HGTV explaining riverfront parcels and ROI on Kanawha Valley acreage. The man owned tens of thousands of acres in the Ohio River Valley, much of it technically illegal under British law — a detail he resolved by ignoring British law.

Thomas Jefferson

Dreamed of a nation of yeoman farmers cultivating the American West… on lands Jefferson already had his eye on.

Patrick Henry

Before “Liberty or Death,” he might as well have said, “Kentucky land grants or a very stern letter.”

George Mason

Wrote the Virginia Declaration of Rights and bought frontier acreage in roughly the same breath.

Richard Henry Lee

The man who proposed independence also proposed a number of highly optimistic western land investments.

This group was less “Founding Fathers” and more “Colonial Berkshire Hathaway.”

Their philosophy was simple:

Buy cheap, survey often, hope the Crown doesn’t notice.

⸻

2. Enter Britain, Stage Left, With a Giant ‘No Trespassing’ Sign

After the French & Indian War, Britain was:

• Broke

• Tired

• Allergic to further Native wars

• Deeply suspicious of ambitious Virginians with surveying equipment

So in 1763, the Crown issued the Proclamation Line, banning settlement west of the Appalachians.

This did not sit well with men who had already purchased, surveyed, subdivided, or preemptively named half of West Virginia.

Then came the Quebec Act of 1774, which effectively reassigned part of the Ohio region to Canada.

To Virginians, this was like finding out your beachfront condo had been rezoned as “Greater Toronto.”

If Parliament wanted to anger Americans, they were doing a stellar job.

⸻

3. The Shawnee Perspective:

“Stop Surveying Things That Belong to Us.”

Here’s the part land speculators usually glossed over:

People already lived there.

The Shawnee, along with the Mingo, Delaware, and other Ohio Valley nations, did not want Virginians marching in with compasses, boundary chains, and vague promises of “fair compensation.”

Their viewpoint was clear:

“This is our home.

You are not invited.

Please go back to Virginia.

They had just fought the French, fought the British, and now watched survey parties tromp across their hunting grounds like they were measuring for a golf course.

When Virginians pushed deeper, the Shawnee pushed back — diplomatically at first, then militarily.

Conflicts like Dunmore’s War (1774) were basically the Shawnee saying:

“I’m serious. Stop drawing lines on my land.”

Britain, trying to avoid more frontier wars, sided with the Shawnee.

This was completely reasonable…

and completely infuriating to land-hungry Virginians.

⸻

4. And Then There’s Vandalia:

Franklin’s Frontier Colony That Never Was

Benjamin Franklin, never one to miss a business opportunity, helped conceive Vandalia, a shiny new British colony carved out of what is now:

• West Virginia

• Kentucky

• Western Pennsylvania

Part real estate venture, part political project, part ambitious retirement plan, Vandalia would’ve had:

• Pittsburgh as the capital

• Tens of thousands of acres available for settlement

• Investors counting their profits before a single settler arrived

The plan actually received preliminary approval in London.

Then three things happened:

1. The British treasury panicked

2. The Shawnee objected (see above)

3. Virginia and Pennsylvania both screamed, “That’s our land!”

Finally the British said:

“Never mind. No Vandalia.”

Franklin’s investments evaporated, along with his patience for British land policy.

When a man loses a fortune, he reflects deeply on liberty.

⸻

5. The Ingredients for Revolution (Real Estate Edition)

By the 1770s, a combustible mixture had formed:

• Wealthy Virginians with land they couldn’t use

• Franklin with a failed colony he couldn’t build

• Veterans promised land grants they couldn’t claim

• A British government blocking westward expansion

• Shawnee nations refusing displacement

• A colonial belief that “freedom” meant expanding westward without London’s permission

Add taxes, stir gently, and light with a spark from Lexington and Concord.

Voila.

Revolution.

⸻

6. So Did America Fight for Liberty or Land?

Yes.

Both.

The founders passionately believed in:

• Natural rights

• Representative government

• Self-determination

• And turning a tidy profit on riverside acreage in the Ohio Valley

We aren’t cheapening the Revolution by saying this.

We’re telling the truth in full.

America was absolutely founded on high ideals —

and also on an epic real estate dispute.

⸻

7. The Bottom Line

The Revolution wasn’t just about Parliament and taxes.

It was about a tug-of-war between:

• British officials trying to avoid frontier wars

• Shawnee communities fighting for their homeland

• Virginia gentlemen defending their right to buy land they didn’t live on

Freedom and property were so intertwined that by 1776, the Founding Fathers could barely tell them apart.

So yes — America was born out of liberty, Enlightenment ideals…

and a very early form of frontier real-estate frustration.

Posted on

Lessons from Puerperal Fever: Trust in Science Matters

The COVID-19 pandemic and its aftermath eroded public trust in public health policies and institutional medicine. In their place, shamans, discredited pseudo-experts, and individuals without medical credentials have gained prominence, amplified by the reach of social media. Robert Kennedy Jr., a prominent anti-vaccine advocate, is positioned as a potential candidate for Cabinet Secretary of Health. History provides stark warnings about the dangers of rejecting sound scientific principles and the profound impact this can have on a nation’s health.

Puerperal fever, or childbed fever, was one of the leading causes of maternal death in the 18th and 19th centuries, claiming the lives of women shortly after childbirth. The tragedy of its widespread occurrence lies in the fact that the solution—basic hygiene—was discovered yet resisted by the medical establishment and society for decades. Two pivotal figures, Ignaz Semmelweis and Oliver Wendell Holmes, made significant contributions to combating this deadly condition, yet both faced resistance from a system unwilling to change.

Ignaz Semmelweis: The Savior of Mothers

In the mid-19th century, Ignaz Semmelweis was a Hungarian physician working at the Vienna General Hospital, which had two maternity clinics. He noticed a striking discrepancy: one clinic, staffed by physicians and medical students, had a much higher mortality rate from puerperal fever than the other, which was staffed by midwives.

Semmelweis hypothesized that physicians, who often conducted autopsies before delivering babies, were transferring infectious material to patients. In 1847, he introduced the practice of handwashing with chlorinated lime, which dramatically reduced mortality rates—from nearly 18% to less than 1%.

Despite his compelling results, Semmelweis faced intense opposition. The medical community, entrenched in tradition and resistant to criticism, dismissed his findings. Many doctors were insulted by the implication that their practices were contributing to patient deaths. In addition Hungary’s struggle for independence and its opposition to Habsburg rule in the mid-19th century created a sociopolitical backdrop that indirectly hindered the adoption of the hygienic practices advocated by Ignaz Semmelweis. Several factors contributed to this dynamic:

1. Political Turmoil and Distrust

  • The Hungarian Revolution of 1848–49 against Habsburg domination and the subsequent suppression by Austrian forces created widespread political instability. In such an environment, scientific advancements were often overshadowed by nationalistic and political concerns.
  • Semmelweis, though Hungarian, worked in Vienna under the Habsburg monarchy. This affiliation may have complicated the acceptance of his ideas in Hungary, where anything associated with Habsburg rule was met with skepticism.

2. Resource Constraints

  • The aftermath of the revolution left Hungary economically weakened and socially disorganized. Hospitals and medical institutions, already limited in resources, struggled to implement new practices that required infrastructure and consistent training, such as handwashing with chlorinated lime.

 Semmelweis’s inability to articulate his findings diplomatically, coupled with his increasingly combative demeanor, further alienated him from his peers. Tragically, he was institutionalized and died in 1865, long before his hand washing protocols gained acceptance.

Oliver Wendell Holmes: A Parallel in the United States

Around the same time, American physician Oliver Wendell Holmes was independently addressing puerperal fever. In 1843, he published “The Contagiousness of Puerperal Fever,” in which he argued that the disease was infectious and could be transmitted by physicians and nurses. Holmes emphasized the importance of hygiene and the need for strict protocols to prevent the spread of infection.

Holmes’s work was met with similar resistance. Many physicians rejected the idea that they could be responsible for spreading disease. Some accused him of undermining the reputation of the medical profession. Nevertheless, Holmes persisted, advocating for systemic changes that eventually influenced medical practices in the United States.

The Tragic Cost of Resistance

The refusal to accept Semmelweis’s and Holmes’s findings delayed the adoption of antiseptic techniques, leading to countless preventable deaths. Their experiences highlight a recurring theme in medical history: progress is often hindered by the reluctance of entrenched systems to embrace new ideas, especially when those ideas challenge the status quo.

Lessons for Modern Health Leadership

The story of puerperal fever, Semmelweis and Holmes  is a stark reminder of the cost of ignoring science. Today’s health crises—whether pandemics, chronic disease management, or antibiotic resistance—demand informed, expert leadership. When science is sidelined, history tells us lives are lost.

The U.S. must learn from the mistakes of the past and ensure that those tasked with safeguarding public health possess the qualifications and humility to respect evidence, embrace change, and prioritize the well-being of the population over personal or political agendas. Let’s not allow history to repeat itself.

Posted on

The Battle Against Fake Science

The fates of Dr. Li Wenliang and Dr. Anthony Fauci will be irrevocably linked in our current times. Both physicians were muted by their respective political overlords:  Dr Wenliang sacrificed his life in the pursuit of warning the world of a deadly airborne virus originating in Wuhan, China and Dr Fauci, by the Trump Administration in thwarting his public health efforts in limiting morbidity and mortality. In these unsettling times, the assault on medicine and public health is not only lethal, but tolerated by industry, public opinion and political factions. 

When capitalism and profit intersect with human health, the American experience has often been in the favor of the former. American medicine in the 19th century was profit driven, fueled by several hundred medical schools that had no legitimate science curricula, no formal training programs and no criteria for competent professors. US medical students, desiring a top flight education, would journey to Paris to get state of the art instruction. Snake oil salesmen who peddled dangerous potions for multiple ailments thrived in the 19th century. 

The 20th Century provided some sanity and sanctity in the pursuit of science and healthcare. Abraham Flexner, an American educator, at the request of the Carnegie Foundation, reported in 1910 on quack medical training that resulted in the closure of multiple schools and began the scientific basis of medical education in the U.S. The Food and Drug Administration, established in 1906,  provided an oversight of drug therapy and provided a safety net to the general public.

Greed and the pursuit of profit in healthcare today still cannot be denied.  Popular entertainment reinforces the profit motive. Mr. Wonderful, on Shark Tank, when reviewing a vitamin and herbal supplement, gleefully queried the proprietor, “I don’t care if it works, what are your yearly sales?” Gordon Gecko, in the 1980’s movie “Wall Street”, uttered “Greed is good.”  Even in the 1950’s, Jim Anderson,  the iconic principled father in “Father Knows Best” sitcom during  the Eisenhower era, readily endorsed the Springfield snake oil salesman’s request for a business license because he was good to his dog and family. 

Congress got into the act of greed and greenbacks in response to a potential flood of pharmaceutical lobbyist money, further sacrificing the principles of science and public safety. Utah Senator Orin Hatch orchestrated potential legislative medical malpractice with The Dietary Supplement and Health Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA) which decreed that over the counter supplements and herbal products did not need to prove safety data prior to their release to the public and any complications would only need to be voluntarily reported. The supplement companies could not claim to treat a “disease” but misleading euphemistic claims such as “supporting health, “wellness,” or supporting a biologic system could be used in advertising without any scientific data to confirm the claim. What was the result? The OTC industry money profits increased from $9 billion to $50 billion,  Salt Lake City, Utah became a destination for the supplement companies. Hatch’s family became lobbyists for the industry and he and other members of Congress had a reliable flow of campaign donations.  What did the consumer get? The answer is clear: A flood of products that resulted in liver injury, life threatening drug interactions and occasional cardiovascular deaths. Product labeling was often misleading or wrong. Probiotics, living bacteria that can contribute to health, were often non viable or absent when analyzed by microbiologist/scientist scrutiny (R. Knight, UC San Diego). Families put themselves into financial jeopardy by spending hundreds of dollars per month on bogus supplements hawked by salesmen and health providers. This was a legislative fiat that legally supported medical quackery.

Now the technology industry is attempting to expand their profits by tapping into our health obsession and circumventing health law. Products that evaluate sleep hygiene, pulse and heart rhythm and oxygenation are entering watches, phones and bracelets. When developing a new technology, the rational response is to compare your experimental device to a gold standard that accurately measures the outcome you are looking at. For sleep analysis this is polysomnography, a medical test that looks at EEG, respiratory rates, eye movements among other data; oxygenation gold standard is the transmission pulse oximeter. Tech companies, such as Fit Bit and Apple, for instance, bypass the gold standard test and support their device results with an opaque “secret artificial algorithm.”  In the few studies that compare products to their gold standard, they are often shown to be inaccurate. The companies, unable to get FDA approval, then take guidance from the supplement industry by using “wellness” as the reason for the biometric. With no reproducibility and no public direction on the meaning and actionable explanation for the results, we are left with tech company advertising babble to encourage their purchase. 

It has been the pandemic of 2020 that has shown the stark reality of science deniers. Trump’s effort to undermine science and mask wearing and the infiltration and destruction of our beloved NIH, CDC and FDA autonomy has been an armageddon moment in healthcare. Pushing hydroxychlorquine, megavitamins and experimental medications that have not been fully vetted in randomized controlled studies as effective cures is unacceptable to the medical community and cannot be recommended as treatments to the public at large. Furthermore,  anti-vaxers, and proponents of the deadly “Herd Immunity” strategy are further evidence of our dilemma.

I am reminded of Dr. John Snow, a British obstetrician in the mid 19th century, who observed his London patient washing her infant’s diapers in a common water pump in town that spread cholera throughout the community. Snow’s work established the water-borne source of cholera and his urging of removing water pump handles. His pleas went unheeded by the public and scientists of his time leading to the death of thousands of additional victims in the cities around the globe. Accepting well designed investigations and their conclusions are our only way to avoid a “Dark Ages” outcome of health goals.

Our hope for the future lies in the investment of science teachers, high quality training of physicians and allied health providers, debunking and removing dangerous healthcare products on our social networks and providing the public with political leaders who want to move away from the past and into the evidenced based medical world of the present. 

Posted on

How Did Trump Happen?

As the key engaged the heavy deadbolt, a loud clank was emitted and the solid steel doors opened the locked ward of the LA County Psychiatric Hospital. That sound and the antiseptic smell of the unit still linger 35 years later, as I walked across the threshold, as a third year medical student, ensconced in my newly pressed white coat and brand new Washington Therapeutics manual.  A large muscular man was leaning on a table brooding and muttering to himself. The psychiatry resident pointed to him and asked me to take a psychiatric history. “He took a bus from Illinois and was arrested on the 405 Freeway while attacking cars on the off ramp with a crowbar.” After eliciting some grunting responses and “God directed me” responses to my clinical questions, I abandoned my medical questioning. “Send him to my office and I’ll demonstrate how to perform a psychiatric history,” my instructor demanded. Summoning the patient into the small office, I sensed a catastrophe in the making. Turning over the psychiatrist’s desk and chairs and uttering a string of expletives in rapid fashion, he stormed out of the room.  The resident paused for a minute and then observed, “That guy is dangerous. F**k the history. Double his haloperidol dose.”

This moment in my medical training recurs in my mind as I watched for the past 3 ½ years at the news correspondents’ quizzical looks as they tried to respond to Donald Trump’s ever increasing disjointed communication.  While my patient in the county psych ward communicated with violent behavior, he nonetheless was unable to express a coherent on-topic conversation that mirrors reality like Donald Trump.  As the evidence mounts of Trump’s psychopathology,  supported by Ivy League and family embedded mental health specialists, the parallel becomes more realistic.

How can you account for the election and sustained authority of a man that has no appreciation for reality, no empathy and no problem solving ability? Three concepts are critical, in my opinion: 1) The firewall of falsehoods that support politics and insulate the economic, profit motive for governance; 2) the pseudo-reality of 7 decades of television watching; 3) the inability of rational people to respond to a psychotic dialogue.

The political firewall of falsehood is particularly thick in our early education. We learn that Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence and the third president of the United States is a great American, however educators skim over his ownership of slaves.  Andrew Jackson, our “people’s president” and victor over the British in New Orleans during the War of 1812, was also the architect of the forced removal and slaughter of the Cherokee from Georgia despite two Supreme Court rulings against its legality.  Various wars fought in the name of preserving the American way of life were often a subterfuge for economic gain. The latter was particularly relevant for me during the Vietnam War, as my generation was drafted and conducted the war at the bequest of past presidents, including the corrupt Richard Nixon. The firewall called the war effort to “prevent the spread of communism” and contain China and Russia from world domination.  These pseudo-facts were debunked by Southeast Asian historical scholars and disseminated in political science courses during my college years and validated by the subsequent arc of history.  Profits and employment opportunities in the U.S. were the nested reasons for this conflict. Lobbyists dominate political decision making and mask the true reason for congressional and presidential decision making. When one does break the firewall of mendacity and falls on the other side, the lure of profiteering can steer you back to the wrong side. No wonder, during my one Vietnam era protest in Washington, I was warned by relatives that this could harm my future employment in Wall Street financial firms. It was hard to contest the Trump supporter’s claim that “all politicians lie.”

Television was the final coup de grace that catapulted Trump into the White House. The lack of critical thinking is pervasive in our society and television has obliterated the lines of news and entertainment. Early television could still cling to morality and group cooperation (think Father Knows Best and Gilligan’s Island). “Reality” shows that masquerade as truth created a fictional narrative that viewers accepted without reservation. Without The Apprentice, Donald wouldn’t have had the political on-ramp he enjoyed.  While all who worked with Trump in the real world of construction and media declared him a fraud, he was on television and they must be mistaken.

In summary, rational people brought up on falsehoods, ensconced in Reality TV  for a number of years combined with protective self-talk when confronted with uncomfortable behavior from elected leaders, begin to accept and adapt to irrational discourse and actions. Consequently, they excuse or ignore it.

So the narrative goes as follows: Yes, he tells lies, but don’t all politicians do the same (the firewall of falsehood) and he’s a competent businessman, it says so on television. The psychosis element is dismissed by either: 1) not dealing with it (think of how many people avoid the homeless);  2) he couldn’t be in his position with a diagnosis of mental illness.

Mental illness that erupts into violent and dangerous behavior is easy to discern and react to swiftly with isolating the perpetrator from society.  That was easy to understand in my early days of training. Like the frog slowly boiled in hot water,  we have as a society built a firewall from truth, televised abnormal behavior into entertainment and have been trained to look away and excuse or normalize statements of question or actions by leaders when confronted with uncomfortable behaviors.  My Uncle Jack use to respond to all inexplicable government driven situations with, “It’s Fixed.”  I think he is correct, but it is up to us to fix the fix.