cnut, hammett, and trump

Posted on by
2

I recently mentioned to a friend that, despite the ongoing horror of Minneapolis, I feel more optimistic about the future than I did a year ago. And he agreed. He said something like, “It’s that whole King Cnut thing, right? Trump may think he’s the king, but even the king can’t hold back the tide.”

I stopped myself from correcting him. For some reason, people think the Cnut versus the Tide story is about Cnut’s arrogance. It’s not. I’ve forgotten the issue at hand, but Cnut’s posse was suggesting that as king, he had godlike powers. Cnut was saying, “Nope, I’m just a guy with a good job.” When he set his throne on the beach and ordered the tide NOT to get his feet wet, he was demonstrating the fact that he couldn’t hold back the tide.

Cnut getting his shoes wet.

But aside from buggering up the analogy, my friend is (I think) correct. Trump may think he’s got godlike authority. He’s certainly acting like it. In Minneapolis, in Greenland, in courtrooms across the US, in social media. Just yesterday on his Truth Social site, he (or one of this fluffers) wrote:

In Minnesota, the Troublemakers, Agitators, and Insurrectionists are, in many cases, highly paid professionals. The Governor and Mayor don’t know what to do, they have totally lost control, and our [sic] currently being rendered, USELESS! If, and when, I’m forced to act, it will be solved, QUICKLY and EFFECTIVELY! President DJT

This is Trump distilled. Three lines–all lies–that encompass Trump’s view of the world. First, he presumes nobody ever takes a risk for any reason other than personal gain. If people demonstrate against him, somebody must be paying them. Second, he’s compelled to belittle and insult those who oppose or disagree with him. And third, he needs to assert his own superiority–to brag about his own abilities. It’s all there in three lines.

Does he actually believe all that? Maybe. I don’t know. Dashiell Hammett, in a 1923 short story, wrote, ‘If a man says a thing often enough, he is very likely to acquire some sort of faith in it sooner or later.’ Hammett was pretty astute. I assume there are moments when Trump is truly convinced he’s a superior being.

It doesn’t really matter if Trump believes his own bullshit. The tide doesn’t. And like my friend, I’m inclined to believe the tide is slowly turning against Trump. He’ll shout and threaten and bluster and bribe, but he’ll never control Greenland and he’ll never subdue Minneapolis.

The tide is an insistent sumbitch.

in fear for my life

Posted on by
6

By now, we’ve all seen the various videos of the recent horrific event in Minneapolis. TrumpCo and MAGA are pressing the view that the shooting was justified. What they want you to hear is that Jonathan Ross is a highly trained, experienced law enforcement officer who shot and killed a professional radical agitator who attempted to murder him with her car. His behavior, they claim, was justified because he was in fear for his life.

Another perspective. Renee Nicole Good was a 37-year-old mother of three (a daughter and two sons), a poet, and a stay-at-home mom married to Rebecca Good. They’d recently moved to Minneapolis from Kansas City. She volunteered to be a legal observer monitoring ICE operations in her new home. She and her wife (and dog) were surrounded by masked and uniformed armed men who were yelling at her and aggressively attempting to open her car door, She attempted to leave the scene, likely because she was in fear for her life.

There’s no doubt that fear makes people do stupid stuff. Fear makes people act on impulse rather than reason. Fear is valid.

But the law, it seems, prioritizes the fear of policing agents. The law prioritizes the fear of the only people at the scene who are carrying weapons. The law prioritizes the fear of the only people at the scene who have the legal authority to shoot people. The law prioritizes the fear of the only people at the scene who are trained when and how to use deadly force. The law prioritized the fear of the only people at the scene who have been trained NOT to give in to their fear. The law not only prioritizes their fear, it justifies it.

The law does not consider the fear of a woman surrounded by several masked armed men yelling at her and attempting to drag her and her wife from their vehicle. The law does not value the fear experienced by Renee Nicole Good.

EDITORIAL NOTE: Patriarchy must be smashed. The shattered splinters that remain must be ground into dust. That dust must be encased in lead and buried in an unmarked grave in the deepest desert.

an amazing thing

Posted on by
8

Before actually addressing the nation, Comrade President Trump called in to Fox & Friends to chat about the raid that captured/kidnapped Venezuelan president Maduro. He said this:

“I mean, I watched it literally l like I was watching a television show. If you would’ve seen the speed, the violence — it was an amazing thing.”

Like I was watching a television show. There it is. Trump and his Cabinet of Yahoo Nazgûl suffer from cinematic epistemology. Their understanding of how the world works–and more importantly, how military operations work–is based on action movies. The good guys (and, again, this is TrumpCo’s definition of ‘good guys’) swoop in quickly, there are explosions and gunfire, a few secondary characters get shot (and maybe die heroically), the bad guys are killed or captured, the good guys manage to barely escape. Once back at their base, the exhausted heroes laugh and joke and maybe weep manly tears for their lost/wounded comrades, but are nevertheless proud to have served their nation. Then the credits roll.

They don’t give much thought to what happens after the credits roll. That shit’s boring. If the film is profitable and draws an appreciative audience, they may consider a sequel. Maybe in a new setting. But basically, once the music starts and the lights go up, the movie’s over. Somebody will clean up and put stuff in order, doesn’t much matter who.

Did some Venezuelans die during this raid? Nobody’s bothered to discuss that. They’re just background actors. Non-player characters. Who cares about NPCs?

Don’t get me wrong, Maduro IS a bad guy. A very bad guy. He’s a dictator; he’s banned opposition parties, he stole Venezuela’s last election, he’d blatantly corrupt, he’s encouraged corruption among his administration and military leaders. He’s approved of torture and murder. He’s made deals with drug dealers. He’s…well, he’s a lot like Trump his ownself.

But Maduro really isn’t the issue. At least not for those of us in the US. The issue for us is that we have a corrupt, delusional president, a Cabinet that caters to his corruption and delusions, a Congress that refuses to challenge him, and a Supreme Court that shrugs off most of his depredations.

We’re not in a goddamn movie. We need leaders who understand that. We desperately need leaders who’ll at least try to hold Trump and his enablers accountable.

Editorial Note: The illustration is an 1883 wood engraving by Albert Robida for his book entitled “Le vingtième siècle” (The Twentieth Century). The original caption is “Les correspondants à la guerre” (The war correspondents).

things i’d like to see in 2026

Posted on by
12

2025 sucked, don’t even try to tell me otherwise. 2026 has the potential to be better, though it could implode at any moment. Nothing is certain. However, in a feeble attempt to be optimistic, I’ve make a list of things I’d like to see in 2026. I don’t expect to see any of them, but hey, there’s no harm in hoping.

Anyway, in no particular order, I’d like to see:

  • local municipal police officers arresting ICE agents for violating the law. These assholes are running wild in the street and ain’t nobody holding them to account. Arrest them, cuff them, give them a fair trial.
  • sensible legislation limiting e-motos. I’m talking about these stubby bastards. They’re sold as ebikes, but they’re not intended to be ridden like bikes. I don’t have anything against them as a mode of transportation, but the sad reality is a LOT of these e-motos are ridden by assholes. Assholes ruin everything.
  • speaking of bikes, I’d like to see more people dressed in normal clothes on bikes. This isn’t a dunk on folks who wear lycra and ride road bikes. I’d just like to normalize cycling as transportation, not just as a form of exercise.
  • women in US films & television shows that look like actual women wearing actual women’s clothing with sensible shoes instead of models in high heels. Give me more Sarah Lancashires, more Olivia Colmans, more Susan Wokomas, more Lesley Manvilles. Give me women who can act, not just look good. (Okay, we have Merritt Wever in the US, who is fucking amazing; give me more Merritt Wevers too.)
  • Donald J. Trump in handcuffs and an orange jumpsuit…in a coffin.
  • quiet spaces. Deliberately quiet spaces, both indoors and outdoors, both public and commercial. Not silent spaces; just quiet. Spaces where you can have a conversation. Coffee shops, pubs, restaurants, and other businesses that commit to quietness should be given tax breaks.
  • Brett Kavanaugh busted for DWI.
  • a mini-series based on Ellen Kushner’s novel Swordspoint. Or any of her novels, really.
  • billionaires taxed out of existence. There’s no reason for billionaires to exist. Nobody has any real use for that much money. Every dollar somebody ‘earns’ over a billion dollars should be taxed at 100%. I mean, c’mon, if you spent US$100 thousand every single day, it would take you more than 27 years to spend a billion dollars. That’s just nuts.
  • more dedicated infrastructure for bicycles and other forms of mobility. I’m talking about bike lanes and secure bicycle parking. We should really make it safe and easy for not just cyclists to get around, but also folks in wheelchairs (and we should subsidize motorized wheelchairs to a much greater extent). We should drastically decrease car dependency (and the operative term there is ‘dependency’).
  • much much much more funding for the Arts. All sorts of arts, and especially weird esoteric arts, even if we don’t like them. Hell, we should encourage people–ordinary people–to take up any form of expression. I’d go so far as to support accordion players and mimes. It would make people happier, and lawdy, we need happier people.
  • also, Trump’s name removed from the Kennedy Cen…well, from everything.
  • capes for mail carriers. These people are fucking heroes; they deserve capes.

Okay, that’s enough. None of these things will happen (although I think there’s a decent chance Comrade Trump will go toes up in the next 12 months), but they’re still it’s nice to think about. Oh, wait. I forgot one.

I’d like to see the patriarchy smashed into tiny shards, those shards ground into the finest dust, that dust buried deep in the earth, and the earth above it salted so that nothing will grow there for a thousand years. Or so.

There. Done.

Editorial Note: By the way, the illustration is a wood engraving by Frederick Sandys from the early 1860s. It’s called ‘The Old Chartist.’ Chartism was a British working class movement that called for 1) the vote for every man aged twenty-one years and above (women, of course, were totally fucked), 2) secret ballots, 3) no property qualification to be a Member of Parliament, 4) payment for Members (so working men could temporarily leave their regular employment to work in the public interest), 5) annual elections. These were radical wishes unlikely to occur, much like my wishlist above.

punchdrunk villa

Posted on by
Reply

When you have an infantile Secretary of Defense with an inferiority complex and a desperate need to prove his manhood (yes, I’m talking about Pete Hegseth here), you have to expect a lot…and I mean a lot…of performative macho bullshit. Like murdering alleged drug runners in small craft with MQ-9 Reaper drones firing Hellfire missiles. Like inventing military medals so he and Commander-in-Chief Comrade President Trump can hand them out on stage.

I’m talking about the Mexican Border Defense Medal. It’s basically the Temu version of the Mexican Border Service Medal issued in 1918. The Mexican Border Service Medal was issued to troops who weren’t eligible for the Mexican Service Medal, which was issued in 1917.

Okay, there’s a good chance you’re saying, “Wait…what?” right about now. Here’s what you need to know (okay, you don’t actually need to know this, but it’ll help if you want to understand all this). For about eight and a half years–from 1910 to 1919–the US was involved in a low intensity (punctuated by some serious, deadly skirmishes and battles) border war with Mexico. Mexico was engaged in a civil war at the time. On top of that, Mexico was also a potential ally of Germany in World War One. Really, it was a whole thing–Germany sent a secret, encoded telegram to Mexico saying if the US entered the war against Germany, Germany would help Mexico invade the US and recapture the states of New Mexico, Texas, and Arizona. So yeah, the US had troops at the Southern border. We even invaded a few times, and at one point occupied Veracruz for half a year.

Gen. John ‘Blackjack’ Pershing during the Mexican War

The thing is, there was a shooting war with Mexico and some Mexican paramilitary elements (like Pancho Villa), and even a few German soldiers. So the troops involved in that shooting war were given a medal. The Mexican Service Medal. Some of the serious Big Hat folks in World Wars 1 and 2 earned that medal. Like ‘Blackjack’ Pershing, and Douglas MacArthur, and George Patton, and John LeJeune.

A year later, troops who weren’t involved in the shooting part of the war–the troops who provided logistics and support (without which the combat troops would go into battle with rocks and sharpened sticks)–were awarded the the Mexican Border Service Medal. They also faced danger.

Now Pete Hegseth and Comrade Trump have issued the Mexican Border Defense Medal. You’re probably wondering how a service member earns this prestigious new medal. Well, I’ll tell you. They have to be assigned, attached, or detailed for at least 30 days to a unit deployed within 100 miles of the US-Mexico border (or 24 nautical miles in adjacent US waters) as part of a designated operation supporting the Customs and Border Protection Agency.

Pete Hegseth awards the Mexican Border Defense Medal (to a woman who could probably kick his ass).

Seriously. That’s it. You didn’t have to actually DO anything. Just be assigned to a unit near the border. It’s such light duty Pete Hegseth thinks even girls can do it. And hell, he’ll hand them a medal too. That’s the kind of guy he is. I’m sure he’d rather be giving the medal to the MQ-9 Reaper drone operators, but they’re sitting in air conditioned rooms in (probably) Yuma, Arizona, which is too far away for them to get the Mexican Border Defense Medal.

But what’s important is that the medal gives Hegseth and Comrade Trump a chance to stand around with men (and a token number of women) in uniform and hand them a medal. It makes them feel important. Competent. Maybe even manly. During the ceremony in which the first 13 medals were issued, Trump noted that the troops had “endured scorching heat and bitter cold, and had given up their holidays and weekends.”

Greater love hath no man (or, possibly, woman) than to give up holidays and weekends to…to…to stop families escaping poverty and violence from crossing the Southern border of the United States?

Jesus suffering fuck…these people, I declare.

caedite eos

Posted on by
12

It’s been reported by both the Washington Post and CNN that Whiskey Pete Hegseth, the Secretary of Defense (not War) has committed either war crime or murder. Well, they didn’t come right out and say that, but they’re reporting he gave orders to “kill everybody” (‘everybody’ in this case refers to the 11 people aboard a civilian vessel allegedly carrying drugs).

Whether it was murder or a war crime depends on whether you 1) buy into the Trump administration’s bullshit argument that the folks on that boat were involved in a “non-international armed conflict” or 2) believe those 11 people were ordinary run-of-the-mill drug smugglers. If you go for Door Number 2, then killing them with a couple of rockets is plain old mass murder. You can’t just execute people you suspect are drug smugglers; you have to go through that whole ‘due process’ business guaranteed by the US Constitution. (Also? Eleven people? On a smuggling run? Them’s some really inefficient smugglers.)

If you buy Door Number 1, then it’s a war crime. It becomes a war crime because the initial rocket attack didn’t kill everybody. Two people survived the first explosion and were clinging to the wreckage when Hegseth (allegedly) ordered a second strike to kill them. The Geneva Conventions clearly state that people who are not capable of engaging in combat due to “sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause” have to be “treated humanely.” Blowing up people clinging to the wreckage of a boat is pretty fucking far from humane.

Either way–murder or war crime–Pete Hegseth ought to be removed from office and…I don’t know, made to cling to some wreckage in the Caribbean.

Mr. P. Hegseth, Secretary of WTF

Hegseth, it seems, sees himself as some sort of modern-day crusader. He has a Jerusalem cross (also known as the crusader cross) tattooed on his chest and the words Deus Vult (God wants it) tattooed on his bicep. Both of that phrase and that symbol can be found on the coat of arms of the Order of the Holy Sepulcher of Jerusalem–a militant group of Christian warriors founded in 1099 during the First Crusade to protect Christians and Christian property.

It’s maybe instructive to remember (or learn for the first time) that not all of those famous crusades took place in what are called the holy lands. Nor were they all directed against Muslims. But they were all really really really fucking brutal. For example, the Albigensian Crusade (1209 to 1229) took place in southern France and northern Italy and its purpose was to eliminate the Cathars, a Christian sect considered by the Church (there was only the one recognized Christian church back then) to be heretics.

It was a popular crusade among the ruling classes of the early 13th century because 1) it was a LOT less fuss and expense to go kill people in Europe than to travel all the way to the Middle East, where they spoke different languages and ate strange food, 2) unlike the Muslims, the Cathars were pacifists, so killing them was less dangerous, and 3) you still got cred from the Church for being a Good Christian.

There was a big Cathar community in a town called Béziers on the Mediterranean coast. A crusader army under the command of Arnaud Amalric was sent to deal with them. There was an attempt to get the local Cathars to surrender themselves, but it failed. During the negotiations, a small skirmish got out of hand. Amalric was told that it was impossible to differentiate between the ‘good’ Christians and the Cathars, so he gave the order, “Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius,” which is translated as “Slay them. The Lord knows those that are His.” In other words, kill them all and let God sort it out.

Amalric reported it to the Pope, writing “Our men spared no one, irrespective of rank, sex or age, and put to the sword almost 20,000 people. After this great slaughter the whole city was despoiled and burnt.”

Assuming the reporting is accurate (and given all we know about him, it certainly could be), Hegseth’s order to “Kill everyone” can be seen as a smaller, more modern version of the crusader order, “Caedite eos,” Slay them. If they’re not guilty, God will deal with it. So long as you’re doing God’s work, it’s okay. You can’t make an omelet, and all that.

Three years after the massacre at, Arnaud Amalric was made the archbishop of Narbonne. Three months after sinking that particular boat, Pete Hegseth is facing a Congressional investigation. With Comrade Trump as president, we may soon see Hegseth become an archbishop.

Trumpsgiving

Posted on by
5

Two National Guard troops from West Virginia were ambushed yesterday in Washington, DC by an Afghan immigrant. WHY did this happen?

I’m going to speculate here. (Okay, quick tangent: the term speculate comes from the Latin ‘speculari‘, meaning ‘to observe’. Originally it meant to observe closely and intelligently, but by the 16th century it acquired a hint of disparagement and began to mean mere conjecture. I’m hoping to speculate in the original sense of the term.)

I speculate that we can draw a fairly straight line from Trump’s 2020 deal to withdraw US forces from Afghanistan to yesterday’s shooting.

You may not recall, but Trump basically betrayed the recognized Afghan government by negotiating a deal with the Taliban (AKA the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, which the US did NOT recognize as a legit government). He agreed 1) to withdraw US forces from Afghanistan within 14 months, 2) to close five US air bases within 135 days, 3) to NOT to provide air support for Afghan forces unless Taliban units were within 500 meters of those forces, and 4) to require the Afghan government to release 5000 Taliban prisoners (allowing them to resume fighting against Afghan government). In exchange, the Taliban promised not to attack US forces (they could still attack Afghan forces).

This was a disastrous deal. Not only did the US have to sacrifice a LOT of equipment by closing those five airbases in such a short time, but that equipment was seized by the Taliban. After the agreement was signed, the Taliban conducted more than 4,500 attacks against Afghan forces. Without US military ground and air support, the next 45 days were among the bloodiest in the 20 years of war.

Trump signed the agreement in February of 2020; in January of 2021, Uncle Joe Biden became president. He was obligated by Trump’s agreement to withdraw the rest of the US forces from Afghanistan, which he did. It was predictably chaotic. However, Biden also initiated a program called Operation Allies Welcome to evacuate thousands Afghans who were at risk of Taliban reprisal.

Not surprisingly, Trump and MAGA were critical of Biden for ‘abandoning’ Afghans who helped the US AND for welcoming too many Afghans into the US. Rahmanullah Lakanwal, the accused shooter, was one of more than seventy thousand Afghans who emigrated to the US as part of that program.

In August of this year, Trump cancelled many of the programs created to help those Afghan refugees who’d aided US forces during the war. He also fired the members of the Coordinator for Afghan Relocation Efforts (CARE) team administering what was now called Operation Enduring Welcome. He strippied them of their legal status, targeting them for deportation back to Afghanistan, where they would be in danger from the Taliban.

At this point in time, we’ve no information if Lakanwal and/or his family were facing deportation.

Combine that with Trump’s decision to deploy National Guard troops to Washington, DC and other Democrat-controlled states and cities against the wishes of the leaders AND the residents of those cities. Combine that with the depredations of ICE essentially kidnapping people and deporting them without any due process.

And hey bingo, here we are.

Again, this is just speculation. Many of us have also speculated that Trump’s purpose in deploying all those troops despite the opposition of the populace was to provoke some sort of incident that would allow him to further militarize Democratic-controlled cities and states. And now we hear Trump vowing to deploy even more troops to DC.

Today in the US we’re supposed to celebrate Thanksgiving. Traditionally, this holiday was to commemorate the harvest of 1621, in which the Plymouth colonists shared a feast with members of the Wampanoag tribe, who’d helped them survive both a plague and a disastrous winter in the preceding year. This year in particular, there is still much to be thankful for, but there’s also a LOT to be angry about.

There is NO reason for troops to be deployed, there is NO reason for immigrants to be deported in this manner, there is NO reason to withdraw help from those who’ve helped us, and there is NO reason for the families of the wounded National Guard members to have to deal with this, especially on this day. No reason other than Trump.

This year it’s Trumpsgiving. Eat your pie, love your friends and family, and be prepared to stand up to tyranny.

    unlawful orders

    Posted on by
    3

    We’re seeing a lot of discourse about troops and how they should respond to unlawful orders. That’s good. What’s NOT so good, though, is that almost all of the discourse is naive. Much of it comes from civilians who’ve never served and don’t understand how the military operates, or from veterans who were officers. Very little of it is coming from former enlisted personnel–the poor bastards who actually have to carry out those orders.

    Here’s a True Thing and in order to actually understand the current discourse you have to accept the truth of this: the foundation of all military hierarchies is grounded on one simple rule: you are required to immediately obey a direct order from a superior officer. In the military, a direct order is a specific, clear command to do something. Go there, do this. The military instills this in all enlisted troops because in combat, you don’t have time to discuss direct orders. You can’t mull over the moral, ethical, or legal implications of the order. You just have to obey it. Even if the direct order is stupid, even if it’s blatantly obvious to you that it’s the wrong thing to do, even if it puts you or others in extreme danger. You’re supposed to just fucking DO it and do it immediately. You’re actually trained to just fucking do it.

    The only acceptable military response to a direct order is “Yes sir.”

    But but but…what if the order is unlawful? You’re obligated to obey a direct order, but you’re also obligated to REFUSE to obey a direct order if it’s not lawful. The problem, of course, is most troops have a rather vague notion of what is and what isn’t lawful. That problem is compounded by the fact that a direct order must be obeyed immediately.

    What’s a lawful order? Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice isn’t particularly helpful. It suggests a direct order should be presumed to be legal:

    “An order requiring the performance of a military duty or act may be inferred to be lawful, and it is disobeyed at the peril of the subordinate. This inference does not apply to a patently illegal order, such as one that directs the commission of a crime. The lawfulness of an order is a question of law to be determined by the military.”

    So, what’s a service member to do if they’re given a direct order and they’re skeptical about the order’s lawfulness? There’s a protocol for that. You’re supposed to:

    1. Seek clarification of the order. Ask the officer, “Sir, I want to make sure I understand. Are you ordering me to do this thing that seems to me like it might be really fucking illegal?” If the officer answers ‘yes’, but you’re STILL not sure it’s legal, then you’re supposed to…
    2. Consult a higher authority. “Sir, I’d like to talk to your superior or maybe a lawyer before I do this thing that seems to be really fucking illegal.”

    Odds are at this point, the officer will order some other service member to put you under arrest. If the order turns out later to have been lawful, you’re fucked; you may do time in a military prison and you’ll get a dishonorable discharge. If it turns out to have been unlawful, guess what: you’re still fucked. Every officer you deal with in the future will be sure to give every shit detail that comes along, because you can’t be trusted to follow orders from your superior officers.

    This is what’s missing from the discourse. The military is unlike civilian life. If you go to work and your boss tells you to do something you think violates the law, you can refuse. The worst that will happen is you’ll be fired. In the military, you could go to prison.

    It’s easy to say to troops, “Just don’t obey.” It’s not that easy for the troops. Especially when they’re serving under a Commander-in-Chief who pardons and celebrates war criminals. It’s easy to remind troops that ‘just following orders’ didn’t help Nazis during the Nuremberg trials. It’s not that easy when it’s your ass that’s looking at arrest and imprisonment.

    That said, troops SHOULD ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to obey orders they believe are unlawful. But we should also be aware of the risk we’re asking them to take.