Hispanic Fanatic

In the last week, America has endured even more protests (often marred by aggressive cops and/or right-wing lunatics), a surge in Covid-19, and allegations that the president is so corrupt that the House articles of impeachment were penny ante compared to his actual malfeasance.

On a personal note, I’m exhausted from overwork, an old friend abruptly begin spewing Soros conspiracy nonsense, and I think I’m catching a cold.

Yes, there was a major victory for LGBTQ rights, and a narrow win for the Dreamers. So that’s ending the week on a high note. But let’s not push it.

Yeah, I’m taking a break. 

I will be back next week with (hopefully) more astute and coherent points to make.

Until then, I will leave you with this quirky factoid:

A couple of weeks ago, Irene Triplett died at the age of 90 in a North Carolina nursing home. Her father was teenage soldier in the Civil War, and as his only surviving child, Ms. Triplett was the last person to receive a pension from a veteran’s Civil War service.

Every month, the Veterans Administration paid Irene Triplett $73.13. By the time of her death, the family had been collecting the pension for 155 years. One has to wonder about the VA employee tasked with cutting Ms. Triplett’s check each month. He now has a little more free time.

In any case, Irene Triplett was the last living link to the Civil War. Her demise is ironic, considering that it comes at a time when all of us are primed to become living links to the Second Civil War.

So there’s that to consider.

See you next week.

Your life is worth $10 million.

Reading that statement, you may have one of the following reactions:

Wow, I am seriously undervalued.

Does that include the black-market price of both kidneys?

Is that how much the hitman wants?

Just give me five minutes to develop a scam involving life insurance.

What the hell are you talking about?

I will now address the last of those statements.

What I am talking about is the fact that “when evaluating the impact of government policies that affect public health, analysts place a statistical value of about $10 million on each human life as a way of measuring the appropriate amount of risk a policy may cause or mitigate.”

That’s right — when it comes to implementing new policies or jettisoning old procedures, we crunch the numbers and assign a cash value to each life.

Makes you feel valuable, doesn’t it? 

Keep in mind, however, that our old assumptions about the value of human life are changing in this hellish new era. Local governments are fretting about economic damage and the possibility of armed lunatics storming their capitals, and they are responding by ending lockdowns even though “in every instance, looser restrictions improve the performance of the economy but also lead to more deaths.”

This means that the value of a life varies from state to state. For example, one analysis found that “relaxing business closures and stay-at-home rules could cost 13,000 lives in Texas and 12,000 lives in Georgia by September 1, [but] it will also preserve $3.4 billion in statewide income in Texas, and $1.7 billion in Georgia.”

Extrapolating those numbers to “determine the income gained per death when comparing moderate and strict measures” means that your life in Texas is worth $254,000. But your life in Georgia is worth just $247,000.

Talk about a loss in value.

The study estimates 116,000 American deaths by the end of June “if tough restrictions remain in place —but 353,000 deaths if those restrictions are partially lifted.” The researchers add that “if fully lifted, with no further restrictions, deaths would spike to 895,000,” before helpfully adding that “that would save jobs, though.”

Now, when we refer to hundreds of thousands of dead Americans, we most certainly are not talking about you. We are talking about someone else — anyone else — and never you or someone you know. It’s always someone else, probably someone poor with darker skin.

Indeed, most of the people who advocate for reopening the economy don’t seriously believe that they or their loved ones will be infected. Oh, they might say they’re willing to die for the economy, but come on. Who would want their epitaph to be, “He heroically died for a microscopic uptick in GDP”?

On some level, perhaps even subconsciously, most of these people believe that they are magically immune to the virus, or that it won’t kill them because they pray to the correct god, or because they are tough Americans, or because they can buy their way to safety (ok, that last one might be true).

In any case, it’s always a numbers game. For example, consider this hypothetical scenario:

“There is contagious disease that will kill 99 Americans if we do not shut down the country.”

It is doubtful, of course, that we would go into full lockdown if fewer than a hundred people were at risk of dying.

But let’s change a key detail:

“There is contagious disease that will kill 99 million Americans if we do not shut down the country.”

I’m pretty sure most of us would say, “Bolt the doors now,” if one-third of Americans could potentially be killed. Hey, even most of the gun-toting, freedom-lovin’ protesters would suddenly abandon their “principled” arguments if they and their families were in an epicenter.

So that’s the problem. Somewhere between 99 and 99 million is our problem.

There are those who argue, of course, that we should never take economic concerns into consideration when we talk about human life.

But we do this all the time, usually in a subtle, easily acceptable manner. We give cash awards in civil trials for wrongful deaths. We value interstate commerce so much that we built a freeway system that kills thousands of Americans each year. And then there is that aforementioned $10 million number (or $247,000 in Georgia).

Yes, we routinely roll the dice with death.

Of course, it’s a lot more fun to gauge the odds of non-lethal matters. For example, the odds of Joe Biden being elected president are pretty good, as of this writing. But they should be even better, considering that he is running against the only president in history to be both impeached and run the country into an economic meltdown. Plus, this president thinks swallowing bleach is a good idea.

Seriously, how is this even close?

But ultimately, we return to the question of our very existence. What are our odds of making it out of this Covid-19 mess alive?

Well, perhaps we can listen to our old friend Chris Hedges, widely regarded as a brilliant writer, insightful thinker, and possibly the most pessimistic man alive.

Hedges recently discussed our terrifying new era, and he encapsulated his thoughts with the following sentence:

“These days are the good times, as compared to what is coming next.”

Well, I feel better now. Don’t you?

“We do in all honesty hate this world.”

—Heaven’s Gate cult leader Marshall Applewhite

Many conservatives long ago declared their willingness to let others suffer in order to advance a political agenda (e.g., if a 100,000 Iraqis had to die so Americans could buy SUVs, too bad).

Then they increased their zealotry by making suffering an integral part of their appeal (e.g., let’s stuff migrant kids into cages for the sole reason of inflicting pain on them and their families). 

And now they have topped out their fanaticism by embracing homicidal — and even suicidal — behavior (e.g., dying of coronavirus is worth it, just to own the libs).

No, the GOP isn’t merely a fractured political party.

It is now a death cult.

Of course, the phrase “death cult” has been employed “to describe the Republican Party enough lately that it’s probably lost any real meaning, but it’s not far off as a descriptor.”

After all, this is the party that has advocated — strenuously and vigorously — for Americans “to go back to work and make their employers richer even if it kills tens of thousands or more, because they would rather have that happen than adopt the social welfare policies of a civilized nation.”

This is the party that believed voters in Wisconsin should court death to cast their ballots.

This is the party that believes letting Americans die of coronavirus is the “lesser of two evils” compared to harming the economy.

This is the party that dismisses those who have died because they “were on their last legs anyway.”

This is the party that sincerely believes that there are “more important things than living.”

So yeah, the term “death cult” is not an exaggeration.

Still, we have to wonder where this embrace of nihilism and destruction came from. In less than a decade, we have gone from conservatives screaming that fictitious “death panels” were a liberal plot to conservatives screaming that actual death is your patriotic duty.

Well, studies have shown that many of Trump’s supporters have a pathological “need for chaos” that manifests itself in a strong desire “to tear down the system.”

By their nature, these conservatives “think society should be burned to the ground.”

Much of the white working class (i.e., Trump’s base) are depressed about how their lives turned out. Furthermore, they despise both the force of unstoppable demographic change and their loss of unquestioned power and status. They fear the new face of America, which is young, urban, and not white.

Now combine that hatred and anger with a belief that is rooted in hardcore religiosity and/or unyielding political philosophy. And this belief states that “mass death is either necessary or actively good, the product of a higher power — God, the planet, the economy — working its will.”

For good measure, throw in a refusal to admit that they were even a tiny bit wrong to support a corrupt psychopath incapable of empathy or sacrifice (or sarcasm).

You see, “continuing to proselytize on behalf of a doomsday cult whose prophecies have been disconfirmed, although it makes little logical sense, makes plenty of psychological sense if people have already spent [time] proselytizing on the cult’s behalf.” This is because “persevering allows them to avoid the embarrassment of how wrong they were in the first place.”

And wow, were they ever wrong.

Today, “to be a Republican is to believe either that people won’t die if social distancing is ended or that if they do it’s alright.”

Fortunately, even as Covid-19 ravages the country, and armed zealots shriek about “freedom” in a self-righteous suicidal frenzy, most Americans “are striving for social cohesion and solidarity.” This is true even though “Trump is doing everything in his power to divide us, to keep people on edge, mistrustful and at one another’s throats.”

But coronavirus is only the most visible aspect of the GOP’s fascination with death. We know, for example, about the conservative opinion that guns are more important than the lives of schoolchildren. This fanatical devotion to firearms ignores all statistical proofand anecdotal evidence, causing Republicans to view homicide as a minor inconvenience compared to, say, not having a closet full of AR-15s.

And what of the Republican Party’s insistence that climate change is no big deal? Despite just about every scientist in the world saying, “This is going to kill us all and wipe out civilization,” the American conservative basically says, “Like I care.” In fact, the Trump Administration has reversed or weakened almost 100 environmental rules designed to, among other things, prevent the planet from turning into a molten ball of lava.

No, the concept of death does not frighten Republicans — unless it’s at hands of some swarthy foreigner. Then they’re petrified. 

Otherwise, many of them appear to relish to idea of more devastation and violence. They are willing members of a death cult.

In Trump’s inaugural address, he evoked the phrase “American carnage,” which remains a great name for a punk band. Our deranged chief executive — who cannot even be bothered to acknowledge the 50,000 Americans who have died in the last few weeks — promised that he would end this so-called American carnage. Instead, he has brought it to life. Now that “the real carnagehas arrived, he is reveling in it. He is in his element.”

As are his most devoted followers. And they insist that we join them.

Look, we all know that the modern conservative movement is so obsessed with money that many of its adherents are willing to kill off huge swaths of Americans just to keep the stock market humming along. They are not shy about these priorities.

Of course, there are other factors motivating the irrational demand to “open America back up,” other than the love of cash. Supporting motivations include the GOP’s desire to hold on to power, the bizarre appeal of American exceptionalism, the prevalence of twisted conspiracy theories, and the quest to avoid further embarrassing the most bumbling, incompetent president in history.

Now, those are all fantastically bad reasons to risk the lives of thousands of Americans.

But at least things can’t get any darker, can they?

Ahem.

Recently, thousands of protesters gathered in cities across the country to demand that their respective governors ignore medical advice, statistical models, scientific evidence, economic fundamentals, common sense, and basic compassion in favor of, I don’t know, the right to get a haircut or something. 

You see, the tree of liberty needed to be watered with the blood of patriots. Or maybe it was the garden of freedom needed the tears of the righteous. Or perhaps it was the creepy-crawly vines of emancipation required the bodily fluids of the overly zealous. Who can remember all those jingoistic slogans, anyway?

The point is that these super-patriots don’t care if they catch Covid-19 (and they really, really don’t care if you catch Covid-19). They don’t care about flattening the curve or keeping old people alive or overwhelming hospitals or that touchy-feely bullshit. 

They are (supposedly) protesting the denial of their civil rights and the crushing of their freedom.

So for this crowd, ethnic minorities being denied the right to vote is no big deal. But keep some suburbanites from hitting the beach or going to their lake cabins, and suddenly it’s all constitutional and shit.

No, I don’t remember any of these people getting upset about black men being arrested just for walking through the park. However, for these protesters, the mere possibility that they might get ticketed for walking in that same park is grounds for a massive demonstration where guys show up with assault rifles.

Of course, if hundreds of black or Latino men showed up at a state capitol brandishing guns, we all know there would be a lot less pontificating through bullhorns and a lot more sprinting through tear gas.

In any case, these highly agitated neo-Tea Partiers aren’t protesting the total failure of our government to deal with this pandemic, or screaming for affordable healthcare, or raging against the myriad injustices that actually exist in this world.

Instead, they are furious that rich people are losing money. They are protesting their inability to go golfing. With the exception of those who have lost their jobs — an apparent minority in these demonstrations — the protesters are shrieking about being inconvenienced for a few weeks.

This isn’t exactly MLK on the National Mall.

The truth is that “none of the people so desperate to re-open the country that they’re going out to protest — possibly infecting themselves and others with the virus — are asking why the United States of America still can’t figure out testing after months.” 

They aren’t asking why other nations have had more success in containing the virus, “and whether the president might have some responsibility” for America’s botched response.

And they aren’t asking why their revered leader says he supports them — to the point of casually endorsing armed revolt — but then says, “Hey, don’t look at me, cuz it’s up the governors.”

Such questions might get in the way of all that Confederate flag waving, and swastika displaying, and gun-toting — all of which are irrelevant to the issue at hand, but which help ascertain what we are really talking about here.

Because these protests are just an excuse for right-wingers to wrap themselves in principle while they bemoan their supposed oppression. It is in their nature to shriek, “Freedom” every time anyone suggests doing something for the common good. And their latest temper tantrum is a “symptom of a nation that has decided that what you want to be true might as well be true, and can become true if you just say it loud enough.”

These demonstrations tap into the delusions of many conservatives, who “imagine themselves as heroic figures in a make-believe drama, as if demanding the right to go to a bowling alley or a nail salon during a pandemic makes them modern-day Thomas Paines.”

At worst, the protests are an opportunity for white supremacists with AR-15s to shout, “Boogaloo,” or “Paparazzi,” or “Taco Tuesday” or whatever random rallying cry they’re employing to call for bloodshed.

It’s fair to ask how these “liberators” would behave if they lived in England during the Blitz? 

We would likely hear, “Yeah, we’re supposed to keep our lights dim and curtains drawn after dark. But that infringes on my freedom! So I’m lighting up my whole house, and if the Nazis bomb my neighbors, too bad!”

Looking at the protesters — primarily middle-aged white men — one gets the impression that they are used to getting whatever they want, and now, without ever being told no, or asked to share. And like full-grown Veruca Salts, they are throwing massive hissy fits whenever their selfishness gets called out.

The protesters “are not distinguishing themselves by making finely calibrated points about epidemiology or offering up more refined social-distancing plans.” A bellicose demand to open everything right now, damn the consequences, is simply “lashing out in frustration and in anger, frustration and anger that is being incited by the president.”

Most Americans are trying to work together, and overwhelmingly support continued lockdowns. But while “health-care workers are risking their lives to save others, the president and many of his most devoted supporters are fomenting chaos, division, and antipathy.”

In essence, they want all the rights, but none of the responsibilities.

One of my favorite novels is Stephen King’s The Stand. But that doesn’t mean I want to live it.

Yes, as we all know, the coronavirus is here to decimate our population, destroy our civilization, and in an absolute worst-case scenario, cause our millionaires to lose some money in the stock market.

Experts are still trying to figure out if this is the second coming of the Spanish Flu (which killed 5% of the world) or if it’s the most overhyped near-calamity since the Y2K bug.

But in any case, we shouldn’t worry. Because our mega-super genius of a president has a master plan to —

Ha, no.

As we all know, the odds of Trump handling this crisis well are about the same odds as your pet schnauzer winning the Kentucky Derby.

Even his hardcore supporters know that the guy can’t handle this. They elected the man to shake things up, or burn down the system, or undertake some other metaphor that conjures up images of devastation. Trump voters never dreamed that their beloved doddering reality-show host would actually have to deal with a national emergency. He was just supposed to ban the Muslims and deport the Latinos, not come up with a comprehensive approach to fighting a global pandemic. Oh, the injustice of it all.

Early indicators are that the most racist chief executive in history is not up to the task. After all, we’ve already endured disastrous news conferences where Trump has claimed that we will develop a vaccine for the coronavirus quickly, “when in fact there is little chance that will happen.” Hell, the president doesn’t even appear to know how vaccines work, and he’s implied that stricken people should just go into work and spread the disease among their co-workers.

So our prevention efforts are off to a good start.

Now, it’s not just that Trump distrusts science, “always believes he knows more than the experts about any given subject,” and “has increasingly surrounded himself with a team of acolytes who will not challenge him.”

No, there is also the fact that it is difficult “for the public to believe a president who has made more than 16,000 false or misleading claims in his first three years in office.” 

Put it all together, and there is a slight chance that the virus may yet accomplish what impeachment, the Mueller Report, and myriad scandals, fuck-ups, and immoral actions have not, which is to “throw a spotlight on the Trump administration’s criminal negligence,” massive corruption, and idiotic incompetence.

Hey, even Wall Street analysts are saying that a botched response to the virus “may increase the likelihood of Democratic victory in the 2020 election.”

But I will go even further. I will state the following:

This is the election. This microscopic bug — right here. This will likely decide who the next president is. We are in its hands.

You see, if coronavirus unleashes a wave of illness across America — and in a truly horrific scenario, kills thousands — it will be impossible for even Trump and his squad of conspiratorial lunatics to claim that it is fake news. If the stock market plummets, and the economy shudders, many Americans will finally declare that they have had enough of Trumpian chaos.

Conversely, if the virus burns itself out and doesn’t sicken too many Americans, and the economic turmoil is relatively slight, well then, team Trump will claim that the president vanquished the bug and singlehandedly saved the nation (even if, as is virtually 100 percent certain in this scenario, the administration just got lucky despite its inevitable bungling).

Everything that has come before this has just been set-up, politically speaking. This virus now controls our fate.

You can ponder the insanity of that all you want.

Just don’t forget to wash your hands.

As any follower of the Q conspiracy will tell you, why accept objective reality when ludicrous theories are so easy to believe?

Americans have always been pretty good at ignoring perfectly obvious answers in favor of convoluted hypotheses. Just look back at 2016, when Trump’s election caused “Americans across the political spectrum” to stammer and rationalize and search “desperately for any alternative explanation… to the one staring them in the face.” This explanation, of course, was that racism helped fuel Trump’s victory.

Back then, Republicans insisted that there was no bigotry within their organization, that rural white people really, truly cared about limited government, and that coded appeals to racism had not occurred for the last half-century.

Some of them still say that. But come on, once you’ve garnered the Daily Stormer’s endorsement, you pretty much know the company that you keep. Can anyone actually deny that the preferred party of white supremacists is the GOP?

Now, before we pile on the conservatives — always fun to do — let’s look at the Democratic Party.

As you know, self-avowed Democratic Socialist and progressive rabble rouser Bernie Sanders has been running roughshod over his fellow contenders for the presidential nomination. According to the Democratic Party establishment, this is Armageddon, Ragnarok, and doomsday all rolled into one.

The party’s leaders are shrieking that a Sanders nomination will be the death of us all, and they are willing to splinter their organization to prevent it. 

Now, I’m not going to start an argument about Sanders’ electability. First, because as our jabbering bigoted president has proven, anybody with money can win an election. Second, because for every poll or opinion piece that says Sanders will be destroyed in November, there is another one that says he will cruise to victory. The truth is that nobody really knows if Sanders would win or not. So let’s just admit that right now.

The point, however, is there is no doubt that the progressives in the nation have just about had it with the scared, centrist, compromise-at-all-costs attitude of the Democratic Party. That shit may have worked in the 1990s, but it had worn out its welcome by the Obama years.

In fact, it is perfectly clear that Obama would have been a more effective president if he had simply abandoned his efforts to reach out to Republicans, many of whom openly despised him, and just rammed through a more aggressive agenda. Instead, Obama tried to play nice, and what he got was Merrick Garland hung out to dry and a conservative movement that is still (still!) trying to destroy the Affordable Care Act. Really, if Obama had just said, “I’m the boss,” half as authoritatively as Trump has, we might have a public option for healthcare and fewer AR-15s in the hands of psychopaths.

I guess we’ll never know.

In any case, moderate Democrats insist that they can win the next election if they just run Hillary Clinton 2.0, but not the actual Hillary because, you know, everybody kind of hated her. More than that, however, they insist that the Democratic Party’s base is all in on that strategy.

Perhaps they missed the news that “Sanders has jumped out to a double-digit national lead in the Democratic presidential contest.”

Or maybe they skipped over the fact that Sanders has “basically tied or won every single primary so far.”

Or perhaps they ignored the idea that Sanders is winning “because he’s promising to transform the way we do things in a country where the actual voting public doesn’t seem to like how things are done.”

The truth is that the Democratic base — the progressives, the young, the racially diverse — are feeling the Bern. Hell, plenty of middle-aged white liberals are down with Sanders.

The Democratic Party’s insistence that, no, its voters are secretly in love with Joe Biden or just need more time to get to know Amy Klobuchar is not based in reality. 

Cramming a moderate down the throat of Democrats — when it has been made massively clear that they do not want this — is beyond arrogant. It is delusional and self-sabotaging. 

Sanders is popular. His supporters are passionate. And nobody is clamoring for Mike Bloomberg to be president except for closeted Republicans.

Democratic leaders are in denial about their base, just as the GOP establishment was in denial about its base in 2016. But in both cases, the rest of us know the truth.

Let’s say your kid punches another kid in the face for no reason. According to the GOP understanding of human psychology, you should respond by taking your child out for ice cream and saying, “I hope you’ve learned your lesson.”

Yes, in this post-impeachment era, our favorite man-child of a chief executive has gone from barely hiding his criminality to openly boasting of his ability to do whatever he wants. He is more or less “doing that Joker dance down the courthouse steps.”

We would like to believe that all those Republicans who said Trump would learn a lesson have, in fact, learned a lesson themselves. And this would be that a president who is supposedly repentant does not, in general, threaten his political opponents, retaliate against witnesses, pull strings for his corrupt cronies, and treat the Department of Justice more like it is the Ministry of Information — all within mere days of surviving impeachment. It just shows (as if there were any doubt) that “the only lesson Trump ever learns is that he gets away with everything.”

Still, we haven’t heard any apologies or admissions of serious misjudgment from top Republicans. Presumably, many of them are too damn embarrassed to acknowledge their weak-willed naivety and degrading capitulation to an orange buffoon.

However, maybe some of them are not embarrassed in the least. In fact, maybe this entire political nightmare isn’t just a case of Republicans putting up with kakistocracy in exchange of tax cuts and conservative judges. Oh, that’s no doubt true for many of them, and it remains a pathetic excuse for coddling a wannabe dictator. But at this point, it appears that a lot of conservatives are not only fine with a failed businessman becoming king of America, but are actively rooting for an authoritarian despot to run roughshod over democracy.

Keep in mind that studies show that almost one-third of Americans display at least some support for ending democracy and instilling either a strongman or converting to outright military rule. Furthermore, “the highest level of openness to authoritarianism came from voters who supported Donald Trump.”

If you paid attention in history class, you know that we developed the U.S. Constitution to protect against monarchies. But many conservatives are rethinking the whole point of that old parched document.

Of course, nobody really thinks the Constitution is perfect. We may love it, warts and all, in the same way that we love our crazy uncles who think the moon landing was faked. Yeah, we try to dwell on the Constitution’s good parts, and not the Electoral College or that thing about three-fifths of a person.

But what’s interesting about modern conservatives is that, despite their bellicose grandstanding about how much they revere the Constitution, they really kind of hate it. They hate the separation of the branches of government, the power of the judiciary, and the dominance of the federal government over the states. They hate the 1st Amendment, the 14^thAmendment, the 17^th Amendment, and… well, all them except the 2nd Amendment. They despise most of the principles the Constitution was founded upon, and most of the specifics that it consists of.

They don’t like it — not at all. Nope.

What these anti-Constitutionalists really want is someone to take charge, to wrestle the whole messiness of American life and condense it into a simple, easily understood system.

The fact that this is impossible deters them not at all.

Life, as we know, is inherently messy and complicated. It’s unruly and complex even if you live on an island with dozens of people. So the idea that a nation of 330 million individuals — consisting of hundreds of different races, religions, values, and sports team fandoms — can somehow be squeezed into a pleasing, conflict-free flow of humanity is absurd, even pathetic.

And yet, social conservatives yearn for “a strong sense of social hierarchy (the notion that everyone has their place) [that] can arguably provide a coherent structure that makes the world seem less chaotic — and theoretically more controllable.”

Meanwhile, all of us progressives come dancing along — talking about radical upheavals to healthcare and other discombobulating changes to the old-fashioned way of doing things — and conservatives promptly freak the fuck out.

In addition, all the ideas that “multiculturalists believe will help people appreciate and thrive in democracy — appreciating difference, talking about difference, displaying and applauding difference — are the very conditions that encourage authoritarians not to heights of tolerance, but to their intolerant extremes.”

Trump’s hardcore supporters don’t want to “appreciate difference” or stop using plastic straws or try Ethiopian food or acknowledge any of your crazy commie ideas. Instead, they want things to never change, especially if they reside within an even mildly privileged class of American society. 

More than anything, they want someone to do all their thinking for them. They want the strongman to make it all ok, and to make it simple, and to make all the complexities go away.

Yes, it’s true that this approach has culminated in “an indifference to the health of U.S. political and judicial systems on the part of the president, and a willingness to destroy trust in institutions that could take decades to recover from his power plays.”

But hey, that’s not their problem.

I’ve been called arrogant a few times in my life.

And it’s not just angry readers or the stray co-worker who have said that I’m bossy. I’ve had friends tell me that I was arrogant (whatever — they’re just jealous because I’m so much better than they are).

In any case, the dangers of arrogance are well-established. Pride goeth before the fall, hubris got us into Iraq, etc.

That’s all true of course. But it’s also true that genuine arrogance does not originate in confidence. Its root cause is its theoretical opposite, which is insecurity. 

Honestly, does anyone believe that our easily agitated president — lashing out over every perceived slight and spewing all-caps threats over Twitter — acts like a confident, secure individual who knows what he is doing? It’s textbook bullying that masks his insecurity.

By the way, if you think Trump actually does know what he’s doing, you are highly delusional.

Now, if we mix the hazards of insecurity with one of our culture’s favorite demons — toxic masculinity — we get a new, 21^st-century problem that absolutely no one was clamoring for. I’m talking about fragile masculinity.

What the hell is that?

Well, fragile masculinity refers to the fact that “many men feel pressure to look and behave in stereotypically masculine ways — or risk losing their status as ‘real men.’” American machismo is a bastard, and this “unforgiving standard of maleness makes some men worry that they’re falling short.” These men are said to experience “fragile masculinity.”

OK, that all makes sense. But what can this disturbing phenomenon tell us about the times that we are living in?

You might be interested to know that politics “provides a way that fragile men can reaffirm their masculinity.” They do this “by supporting tough politicians and policies” that reassure others (and themselves) of “their own manliness.” 

And yes, a recent study has shown that “Trump appeals to men with fragile masculinity.”

Yikes.

Of course, you may be skeptical that researchers could measure something as ambiguous as fragile masculinity. Well, these scientists are way ahead of you.

The researchers didn’t just ask guys, “Hey, are you feeling fragile these days?” Although the responses to such a question would have been a hilarious YouTube video.

Instead, the study analyzed Google searches that indicated “a high level of concern about masculinity.” Specifically, the researchers identified phrases such as “how to get girls,” “penis enlargement,” and “testosterone,” among others. The scientists then looked at this sad grab-bag of phrases and, after accounting for demographic attributes such as education levels and racial composition, they discovered that Republican candidates “drew more support in areas with higher levels of fragile masculinity.”

Or as the researchers put it, support for Trump was higher “in areas that had more searches for topics such as ‘erectile dysfunction.’” 

So now we’re back to this being a fucking hilarious study.

In essence, there are a lot of very insecure guys out there who are motivated to support Trump because his unrepentant bullying and tough-guy talk makes them feel manly. These omega males appreciate a chief executive who boasts about the size of his penis on national television, because they fantasize about doing the same thing themselves (although if the study is accurate, they may not have any real reason to boast… ahem).

By the way, the researchers found that, like so many aspects of American culture, this all snowballed with Trump. The study found that there was no significant relationship between fragile masculinity and voting in previous elections, which suggests that “fragile masculinity has now become a stronger predictor of voting behavior.”

Furthermore, the researchers theorize that Trump’s “re-engineering of the GOP as a party inextricably tied to many Americans’ identity concerns — whether based on race, religion or gender — will ensure that fragile masculinity remains a force in politics.”

So how do we stop this scourge? How do we keep insecure, fragile guys from wrecking the nation as part of a pathetic, futile quest to feel manly?

Well, regardless of the course of action we choose, one thing is certain.

It’s time to man up.

We have heard from disgraced presidents and esteemed journalists, from nervous demographers and right-wing bigots, from talk show hosts and the oversampled, oversimplified residents of mythical Middle America.

Any they all agree.

Today’s immigrants — primarily Latinos — are just not assimilating. In fact, they seem determined to sequester themselves in ethnic enclaves and keep jabbering away in Spanish. They certainly are not merging into mainstream American culture the way previous immigrants (of good and pure European stock) once did.

Harrumph.

Well, there’s just one problem with that analysis. Actually, there several problems with it, ranging from petty ignorance to overt racism, but we’ll focus on one flaw in the argument: 

It’s not true.

You see, numerous studies have found that Latino immigrants “assimilate very well,” when looking at such factors as educational attainment, labor market integration, and yes, English proficiency. The assertion that Hispanics refuse to join American society is a well-known conservative talking point that has the unfortunate trait of being a pathetic lie.

Now, one can argue over what we mean by “assimilation,” and even whether the term itself is prejudicial. But there is no debate that Latino immigrants and their children are adapting to America very well.

Still, what about those sainted immigrants of yesteryear? We have all heard myriad variations of “My grandfather came here from Norway and never spoke Norwegian again!” Or perhaps it was “My grandmother arrived from Italy and banished everything remotely Italian from her house forever!”

At the risk of busting two myths in one article, I have to point out that this trope — the European immigrant who became “American” overnight — is ludicrous.

Hey, I’ve written before about my home state of Wisconsin, which had a thriving German-immigrant community well into the 20^thcentury.

But since we’re on the topics of Germans — and how perfectly they assimilated into America — this might be a good place to point out that as late as 1938, the German-language Staats Zeitung newspaper was selling 80,000 copies a day in New York City.

This was right around the time when 20,000 Nazis held a rally at Madison Square Garden, an event sponsored by “the German American Bund, an organization with headquarters in Manhattan and thousands of members across the United States.” 

Yes, I said 20,000 Nazis in Madison Square Garden.

The German American Bund “had parades, bookstores and summer camps for youth,” offering a vision that “was a cocktail of white supremacy and fascist ideology.” 

Also, there was that whole Nazi spy ring, made up primarily of German ex-pats, who tried to steal American military secrets and pass them to the Fuhrer.

So I’m pretty sure that rallying thousands in support of your homeland’s murderous ideology, and actively working to defeat your adopted country in a war, isn’t quite assimilating perfectly.

My intention is not to demonize European immigrants. Just to be clear, the vast majority of Germans who moved to America displayed great patriotism. Also, that Nazi spy ring was broken up by a German immigrant who hated fascists.

Plus, I married a fine Wisconsin girl of German ancestry, so there’s that as well.

The point is that we have allowed Latino immigrants to be slandered, slurred, and denigrated, insisting that they can never truly be part of America. And we have done this while shouting that the European immigrants of a century ago became instant patriots about nine seconds after they set foot on U.S. soil.

Neither assertion is true, and to perpetuate them goes beyond simple disservice to the truth. It advances the goals of racists and xenophobes. It harms America.

One final point about Nazis. Recently, students at a Georgia university burned the books of Latina author “following a lecture in which she argued with participants about white privilege and diversity.”

Burning books, of course, is a straight-up fascist move. And this begs the question:

When are those students going to assimilate to American values?

The downside of having 10,000 books that you want to read before you die is that, inevitably, some pretty good titles wind up languishing on your shelves for years. That’s why I only recently got around to reading a bestseller from years ago: The Devil in the White House… Sorry, I meant The Devil in the White City. Ha — I’m sure there’s nothing Freudian about that, nope.

Anyway, The Devil in the White City is a nonfiction book about two overlapping narratives.

First, we have the story of Daniel Burnham, the chief planner of the Chicago World’s Fair of 1893, which was an urban marvel of such grandiosity that its influence is still felt today in the fields of architecture, pop culture, and urban planning. 

Second, we have the tale of H. H. Holmes, notorious for being America’s first serial killer (or at least the first to achieve nationwide infamy).

Both Burnham and Holmes reached the pinnacles of their careers in Chicago at the same time, which is what gives The Devil in the White City its thematic structure. The fact that one designed buildings and the other strangled women is a dissonance that it’s best not to dwell on. 

In any case, one fact about the dual subjects of the book stood out to me.

You see, Burnham’s early life was one of mediocrity, if not outright failure. He sucked at school, bounced around from job to job, and only became successful in architecture after wiping out in other fields.

But he was a white guy who was good looking and charming, and society gave him numerous chances to fulfill his potential.

Holmes was a bald-faced liar who cheated people out of their money and displayed overt sociopathic tendencies.

But he was a white guy who was good looking and charming, and society gave him numerous chances to fulfill his potential.

White City, indeed.

Both architect and murderer benefitted from white privilege, which at that time was so ingrained that it didn’t even have its own name (it was just called “America”). And even though white privilege has been a powerful force in our society for centuries, many people still refuse to believe that it even exists.

Many of these people also refuse to believe that glaciers are melting and that guns are a problem, but I digress.

The point is that Burnham, for all his brilliance, simply never would have had a chance to thrive if he had been black. And he certainly wouldn’t have had the luxury of messing up repeatedly with little consequence. The guy knew that he would be ok, regardless of what he did, and eventually, he created something great.

Holmes was able to con and swindle people all over Chicago, kidnap women and children, and quite literally get away with murder because no one ever considered that this respectable white dude in a suit was anything other than a dignified member of the elite. The guy knew that he would be ok, regardless of what he did, and eventually, he created hell on earth.

Of course, Burnham and Holmes lived in a bygone era, and we have (hopefully) progressed just a little. But we have to wonder how many Latinos and African Americans of towering potential never get even half a chance to make an impact. 

Furthermore, we have to ponder if there are any well-connected white men who drip with incompetence but nevertheless achieve positions of great influence, ultimately doing nothing more than enriching themselves and unleashing misery upon the planet.

No — nobody like that springs to mind…