I like your frame… consistent critique of how far things are moving off track.
Every time I hear DJT say “I don’t need Congress”, I feel the dramatic loss of constitutional government.
The thing I will remember most from the 2026 SOTU speech is the painful look on the face of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as DJT rants about the “wrong” decision on tariffs. Roberts looked like he was watching the death of the Republic with a front row seat. It was absolutely chilling…
To be clear about my previous comment. The men so honored deserved to be recognized in the somber, dignified ceremony those before them were accorded--not as political props in a game show atmosphere. I salute those men; I am disgusted at the treatment they received at the hands of their putative "Commander-in-Chief."
Partial solution: no Olympic athlete should ever be permitted to associate themselves with a nation? (nothing to do with the regime du jour, it's a lifelong belief)
That wouldn't stop regimes from using them for propaganda purposes, even if the athlete doesn't participate in such events (and the athlete could be coerced into such participation anyway, which makes it a dicey proposition to threaten to strip their medals and ban them from future competitions and such, because you can't know if the participation was voluntary or coerced). That's why the ongoing participation of athletes from Russia and Belarus has been controversial, even when they're required to compete as neutrals; Putin and Lukashenko can still use their accomplishments for propaganda.
Completely agree: it's only a partial solution. The point is to start the journey of denouncing the association with nations. Along with eliminating the flags, anthems, marches, etc, at the venue. Team sports of course are a separate problem: random allocation would help a lot. ;)
Loyalty to the cathedral can be good. Looking at it from the perspective of one who started out as an adherent of patriotism until it was beaten out of him (my mistake was to expect reciprocal adherence to the rule of law), it's a fascinating concept! ;) I once associated it with the rise of nationalism, but it's much older, even tribal. Just over 2000 years ago, Horace ironically summarized its dual nature rather brilliantly: dulce et decorum est pro patria mori.
Well, I mean, I consider myself an American patriot to the core. In fact, I would be so bold as to suggest that Notes from the Circus is a practice of that patriotism, which is to say, that I love the idea of America as a republic. As a people self-governed. And I believe the institutions, of course, are subject to revision. Our founders understood this and, indeed, made our constitution and laws amendable.
As Jefferson said on this point, and you can see it etched into the Southeast Portico of the Jefferson Memorial in Washington DC: "I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as a civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."
So I am a patriot. To republic. As an orientation towards the greater good and greater justice. A more perfect union. So O' say does that star-spangled banner yet wave, O'er the land of the free and home of the brave? We're in the process of answering that question and I am very much on the side of Patriots.
On Horace, by my understanding, the expression was usually understood in a straightforward sense until WWI, and it was Wilfred Owen's poem calling it "the old Lie" that led to the current understanding. (Even then, it's still the case in many places that the sacrifices of those who did serve are honourable regardless of what one thinks of the conflict itself; see the outrage over "they stayed a little back, a little off the front lines". That one statement made me consider the Tarnak Farm incident to be a case of enemy fire, rather than friendly fire.)
As for patriotism, I think there's two conflicting conceptions of the term, a negative one and a positive one. The negative conception is the one that demands loyalty to the polity as it exists--"My country, right or wrong". The positive conception of patriotism is loyalty to the highest ideals of the polity--"We cannot rest content with the charge from Washington that this peaceful protest is unpatriotic. ... The fact is that this dissent is the highest form of patriotism.". The negative conception allows little, if any, room for debate, whereas within the positive conception there is room for great disagreement over how best to realize the ideals. One can quite easily reject the negative sense of patriotism and remain a full patriot in the positive sense. (To stick with the Olympic example, witness all the US athletes there who expressed great concern about the actions of the current administration and said that they considered themselves to be representing their conception of the country--positive patriotism--and the angry responses from supporters of the administration who demanded either silence on or support of those actions--negative patriotism.)
EDIT: Another example of this dichotomy of which I'm aware is Minersville v. Gobitis and West Virginia v. Barnette. Requiring respect for the flag and recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance is, to me, negative patriotism (and forced patriotism at that). (Also, on a personal level, it just looks creepy and cult-like.) Perhaps almost inadvertently the Jehovah's Witnesses (and there are many, many other problems with that organization) displayed positive patriotism in suing to win the right not to have to participate in such rituals, but even to this day, by my understanding, students who exercise their right (per Barnette) not to participate are met with a display of negative patriotism from those who do in the form of social consequences.
That still doesn't solve the issue of regimes using athletes for propaganda; I don't think anything can, really. ("That's a nice family you have there; be a shame if something happened to them because you skipped out on this ceremony.")
As for team sports, we already have a form of (somewhat, sort of) random allocation, in the form of professional teams. To me the primary argument for using nationality-based teams is that, for one, they are not club teams, which means there's a different mix of players on the field, and for two, that nations can have their own infrastructure in place to ensure that the national team can play well together, something that wouldn't be available if players were just randomly allocated. It would, in other words, substantially degrade the quality of the competition because the players wouldn't be part of any sort of cohesive whole. (If club teams are used instead, then it's just a rehash of what fans can see on a regular basis anyway, and thus loses some of its appeal.)
You might not like having teams associated with nations, but I think you'd find that the competition would become much less compelling as a sporting matter if players were simply randomly allocated. (The two sports for which I could see some sort of structure like that working are beach volleyball and curling, but not with random allocation, but rather removal of rules or other infrastructure that effectively require players all to share the same nationality; at the international level those sports are contested by professional teams anyway, because it's effectively impossible to build the necessary cohesiveness between the members of an "all-star" team in the time available for competition preparation.)
"We know the old order is not coming back. We shouldn't mourn it. Nostalgia is not a strategy."
This wasn't just a call to action for middle powers to take the metaphorical sign out of the window; it was a direct shot at MAGA and other such groups that their approach is fundamentally flawed.
The sycophancy on display became more than I could bare. I bailed out early. Distressed. In tears. Forehead gripped in hands. The constancy of the clapping Congress to lies upon lies upon lies. From sitting to standing to sitting again to standing again and again and again. Over and over and over. Clapping all the way. Some tainted worshipping scene at 1.5 times speed.
Far worse than Congress were the Guests at the ready with their solemnity. Invitations accepted. No Design or Desire to interrupt proceedings. I hated them. Each one. No longer individuals with their stolen glories and precious griefs. Reduced to a set by their shared sycophantic move away from self and towards Him.
What brought the tears I think was the intolerable juxtaposition of your piece, “The Cathedral and The Compass” I’d been plodding my way partially through, oh so very slowly, for need of looking up innumerable words and references. The Gap. Better yet, the Chasm between the orientations of the two of you I couldn’t Bridge in real time. It was a strange feeling to stand at those opposing Edges and see only down. No tools at my disposal. So I backed off. I’m tearing up just now as I write. And I don’t know WHY.
Sycophancy was so strong when the liar and cheat( chief) was praising himself and bull shitting up on the podium. The Republicans having to stand and applaud every mendacious statement was nauseating
For those of us old enough to remember when there were only three channels, the SOTU address last night reminded me of watching those Jerry Lewis Muscular Dystrophy telethons. A disgraced grumpy old bastard doing schtick in between announcing the entertainment. Bizarrely irrelevant.
Good catch!
I believe he can't see ahead because he wants all the wealth power and glory for himself now.
You are so right that all the medals and honors are made tokens for him to give out like $2.00 bills.
I have always found him to be a usurper. Like a boy who can't make so he has to take. Or like a dog who pees to mark others territory as his own.
Donald loves in the way an abusive husband loves his wife.
I like your frame… consistent critique of how far things are moving off track.
Every time I hear DJT say “I don’t need Congress”, I feel the dramatic loss of constitutional government.
The thing I will remember most from the 2026 SOTU speech is the painful look on the face of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as DJT rants about the “wrong” decision on tariffs. Roberts looked like he was watching the death of the Republic with a front row seat. It was absolutely chilling…
The grief and the rage ~ I feel both in equal measure. Thank you for your eloquence :-)
To be clear about my previous comment. The men so honored deserved to be recognized in the somber, dignified ceremony those before them were accorded--not as political props in a game show atmosphere. I salute those men; I am disgusted at the treatment they received at the hands of their putative "Commander-in-Chief."
I felt rage at the debasement of the Presidential Medal of Freedom. I was (and remain) apoplectic at the desecration of the Medal of Honor.
I keep thinking about the word “posterity” written into the Preamble of the Constitution and which you wrote about recently.
Posterity.
The Founding Fathers were writing about us. The future generations.
And here we are.
With a potus who demands we grovel.
I can’t get that out of my mind.
I feel that exact rage too, but lack the skill to describe it. Thank you :)
Partial solution: no Olympic athlete should ever be permitted to associate themselves with a nation? (nothing to do with the regime du jour, it's a lifelong belief)
That wouldn't stop regimes from using them for propaganda purposes, even if the athlete doesn't participate in such events (and the athlete could be coerced into such participation anyway, which makes it a dicey proposition to threaten to strip their medals and ban them from future competitions and such, because you can't know if the participation was voluntary or coerced). That's why the ongoing participation of athletes from Russia and Belarus has been controversial, even when they're required to compete as neutrals; Putin and Lukashenko can still use their accomplishments for propaganda.
Completely agree: it's only a partial solution. The point is to start the journey of denouncing the association with nations. Along with eliminating the flags, anthems, marches, etc, at the venue. Team sports of course are a separate problem: random allocation would help a lot. ;)
I think patriotism is a good thing. Properly understood, that is.
Loyalty to the cathedral can be good. Looking at it from the perspective of one who started out as an adherent of patriotism until it was beaten out of him (my mistake was to expect reciprocal adherence to the rule of law), it's a fascinating concept! ;) I once associated it with the rise of nationalism, but it's much older, even tribal. Just over 2000 years ago, Horace ironically summarized its dual nature rather brilliantly: dulce et decorum est pro patria mori.
Well, I mean, I consider myself an American patriot to the core. In fact, I would be so bold as to suggest that Notes from the Circus is a practice of that patriotism, which is to say, that I love the idea of America as a republic. As a people self-governed. And I believe the institutions, of course, are subject to revision. Our founders understood this and, indeed, made our constitution and laws amendable.
As Jefferson said on this point, and you can see it etched into the Southeast Portico of the Jefferson Memorial in Washington DC: "I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as a civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."
So I am a patriot. To republic. As an orientation towards the greater good and greater justice. A more perfect union. So O' say does that star-spangled banner yet wave, O'er the land of the free and home of the brave? We're in the process of answering that question and I am very much on the side of Patriots.
On Horace, by my understanding, the expression was usually understood in a straightforward sense until WWI, and it was Wilfred Owen's poem calling it "the old Lie" that led to the current understanding. (Even then, it's still the case in many places that the sacrifices of those who did serve are honourable regardless of what one thinks of the conflict itself; see the outrage over "they stayed a little back, a little off the front lines". That one statement made me consider the Tarnak Farm incident to be a case of enemy fire, rather than friendly fire.)
As for patriotism, I think there's two conflicting conceptions of the term, a negative one and a positive one. The negative conception is the one that demands loyalty to the polity as it exists--"My country, right or wrong". The positive conception of patriotism is loyalty to the highest ideals of the polity--"We cannot rest content with the charge from Washington that this peaceful protest is unpatriotic. ... The fact is that this dissent is the highest form of patriotism.". The negative conception allows little, if any, room for debate, whereas within the positive conception there is room for great disagreement over how best to realize the ideals. One can quite easily reject the negative sense of patriotism and remain a full patriot in the positive sense. (To stick with the Olympic example, witness all the US athletes there who expressed great concern about the actions of the current administration and said that they considered themselves to be representing their conception of the country--positive patriotism--and the angry responses from supporters of the administration who demanded either silence on or support of those actions--negative patriotism.)
EDIT: Another example of this dichotomy of which I'm aware is Minersville v. Gobitis and West Virginia v. Barnette. Requiring respect for the flag and recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance is, to me, negative patriotism (and forced patriotism at that). (Also, on a personal level, it just looks creepy and cult-like.) Perhaps almost inadvertently the Jehovah's Witnesses (and there are many, many other problems with that organization) displayed positive patriotism in suing to win the right not to have to participate in such rituals, but even to this day, by my understanding, students who exercise their right (per Barnette) not to participate are met with a display of negative patriotism from those who do in the form of social consequences.
That still doesn't solve the issue of regimes using athletes for propaganda; I don't think anything can, really. ("That's a nice family you have there; be a shame if something happened to them because you skipped out on this ceremony.")
As for team sports, we already have a form of (somewhat, sort of) random allocation, in the form of professional teams. To me the primary argument for using nationality-based teams is that, for one, they are not club teams, which means there's a different mix of players on the field, and for two, that nations can have their own infrastructure in place to ensure that the national team can play well together, something that wouldn't be available if players were just randomly allocated. It would, in other words, substantially degrade the quality of the competition because the players wouldn't be part of any sort of cohesive whole. (If club teams are used instead, then it's just a rehash of what fans can see on a regular basis anyway, and thus loses some of its appeal.)
You might not like having teams associated with nations, but I think you'd find that the competition would become much less compelling as a sporting matter if players were simply randomly allocated. (The two sports for which I could see some sort of structure like that working are beach volleyball and curling, but not with random allocation, but rather removal of rules or other infrastructure that effectively require players all to share the same nationality; at the international level those sports are contested by professional teams anyway, because it's effectively impossible to build the necessary cohesiveness between the members of an "all-star" team in the time available for competition preparation.)
Indeed! Thank you 💔😡🇨🇦
Also:
"We know the old order is not coming back. We shouldn't mourn it. Nostalgia is not a strategy."
This wasn't just a call to action for middle powers to take the metaphorical sign out of the window; it was a direct shot at MAGA and other such groups that their approach is fundamentally flawed.
The sycophancy on display became more than I could bare. I bailed out early. Distressed. In tears. Forehead gripped in hands. The constancy of the clapping Congress to lies upon lies upon lies. From sitting to standing to sitting again to standing again and again and again. Over and over and over. Clapping all the way. Some tainted worshipping scene at 1.5 times speed.
Far worse than Congress were the Guests at the ready with their solemnity. Invitations accepted. No Design or Desire to interrupt proceedings. I hated them. Each one. No longer individuals with their stolen glories and precious griefs. Reduced to a set by their shared sycophantic move away from self and towards Him.
What brought the tears I think was the intolerable juxtaposition of your piece, “The Cathedral and The Compass” I’d been plodding my way partially through, oh so very slowly, for need of looking up innumerable words and references. The Gap. Better yet, the Chasm between the orientations of the two of you I couldn’t Bridge in real time. It was a strange feeling to stand at those opposing Edges and see only down. No tools at my disposal. So I backed off. I’m tearing up just now as I write. And I don’t know WHY.
Just figuring this out now?
Sycophancy was so strong when the liar and cheat( chief) was praising himself and bull shitting up on the podium. The Republicans having to stand and applaud every mendacious statement was nauseating
Best.
For those of us old enough to remember when there were only three channels, the SOTU address last night reminded me of watching those Jerry Lewis Muscular Dystrophy telethons. A disgraced grumpy old bastard doing schtick in between announcing the entertainment. Bizarrely irrelevant.