A Political Sparring Match: He Lied So Smoothly the Smoothness Remained in the Air Longer than the Obviousness of the Lie

Last night, I felt like I was witnessing a boxing match, not a debate. But instead of using fists covered in gloves, they were using words, smirks, and smiles. Sometimes, it felt like I wasn’t watching but participating, or that I wish I was participating, or wish that my words could be up there. My anxiety was certainly right there. Because it felt so personal. It felt like my life was up there, the life of my neighbors and all those I loved, maybe the whole world was up there.

 

But first, the setting. Hurricane Helene, fueled by the increased ability of air warmed by climate change to hold more water, just a week ago brought devastating rains, winds, and floods, making it one of the worst and deadliest storms to hit the US in history.

 

In the Middle East and Ukraine, the wars continue. I, like so many millions, have been appalled, frightened by the violent destruction there. The violence disturbs me terribly. Not only the initial horrifying attacks by Putin in Ukraine and Hamas in Israel, but what has followed. But my feeling of horror is now focused on Netanyahu ordering Israeli forces to spread the war from Gaza to Lebanon to root out threats to Israel. But by doing so, thousands of innocents are being killed, homes and infrastructure totally decimated.

 

And I don’t know but wonder, as some news sources do, whether Netanyahu is purposefully prolonging the war to serve not his people but his own personal motivations. For example, to avoid possible prosecution, and to stay in power by satisfying his religious conservative base, (like his friend, DT?) and frustrate President  Biden’s continuing efforts to negotiate peace and free hostages.

 

And, in the U. S., of course, there’s this extremely contentious election, where one candidate has been indicted or convicted of several criminal charges, with new evidence of wrongdoing and court filings being revealed even today. And in retribution, threatens to imprison his political rivals if he gets elected to office.

 

So, this is background. Some commentators remarked on the relatively tame or civil proceedings. J. D. Vance on one side, slickly, sickly throwing words and lies like punches, trying to knock out the more neighborly Tim Walz. But Walz would not go down, physically or morally. In fact, he seemed to feed on the attacks, getting stronger and stronger as the night wore on, trying to counter lies with facts. At times, he seemed so filled with ideas he couldn’t get them out fast enough. Or he seemed shocked by Vance’s ability to lie so smoothly the smoothness remained in the air longer than the obviousness of the lie.  And so Walz sometimes stumbled. But he always rose up again. And by the end, he dealt a blow that woke up the world, I hope.

 

And I feared some people would forget that lies, no matter how often repeated, are still lies; that threats, no matter how smoothly repeated, are still dangerous.

 

The last topic of the debate was the 2020 election and DT’s refusal to admit he had lost and peacefully turn over his office to the rightful and obvious winner, President Biden….

 

**To read the whole article, please go to The Good Men Project.

Sherlock Holmes and the Case of Lies and Hate REVISED: With Disinformation, Antisemitism, and Anti-Muslim Attacks Haunting Us Now, this is a Critical Time to Speak of History

I grew up with a love of Sherlock Holmes. Millions of us have. When I was teaching a class on logic and debate to high school students, I used a book of quotes and incidents from Sherlock’s cases to study critical thinking and teach informal syllogisms. So, when I saw a review of a modern version of the detective, not written by Arthur Conan Doyle, and read about the plot, I was intrigued.

 

The author of the book is Nicholas Meyer, a contemporary scriptwriter as well as novelist. It’s called The Adventure of the Peculiar Protocols. The plot is built around actual events from the past that are still haunting the present. And with disinformation, antisemitism, and anti-Muslim attacks haunting us now, this is a critical time to speak of this history.

 

The Protocols mentioned in the title are actual rants, lies, propaganda that were first published in the nineteenth century and, unfortunately, have been reproduced even today. They are called The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

 

The document was created to deceive people into believing Jewish leaders had come together to plot the takeover of the world. In the novel by Meyer, Sherlock is asked to find out if the plot is real and, if not, expose the lie so the truth could be revealed.

 

In truth (as well as in the novel), the Protocols were plagiarized from a work of satire called The Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu, by a writer named Maurice Joly in 1864. It included no mention of any Jew. According to Wikipedia, Joly’s piece was an attack on Napoleon III, elected President of France who later made himself absolute ruler.

 

Joly has Montesquieu speak in support of democracy and argue that the “liberal” spirit in people was indomitable. Machiavelli argues it wouldn’t take him even 20 years to “… transform utterly the most indomitable European character and render it as docile under tyranny as the debased people of Asia.”

 

In the end of the satire, absolutism wins, and Montesquieu is consigned to remain in hell.

 

The piece would have been consigned to oblivion, except probably for Pyotr Ivanovich Rachkovsky, head of the Russian Okhrana or secret police of the Tsar Nicholas II. He commissioned a re-write, to replace the attacks on Napoleon with attacks on the Tsar. And to turn the meeting between two dead philosophers in hell to a meeting in Switzerland by Jews.

 

In the original, Machiavelli argues “Men must not scruple to use all the vile and odious deceits at their command to combat and overthrow a corrupt emperor…” Just change a few words and we get the tenth protocol, “Jews must not hesitate to employ every noxious and terrible deception at their command to fight and overturn a wicked Tsar…”

 

And there were in fact meetings by Jews in Switzerland in the nineteenth century, but they were not secret. They were Congresses called to create a Jewish state. Unlike the plot of the plagiarized and fictional Protocols, the meetings had nothing to do with overthrowing the Tsar or any other state….

 

**To read the whole article, please go to The Good Men Project.