1. Winning by Destroying: Trump and Gingrich
2. In the Depths of the Digital Age
3. Trump: The Haunting Question
4. After 3
Years of Daily Crisis Writing
This is a Nederlog of Friday, June 10,
is a crisis log.
1. Winning by Destroying: Trump and Gingrich
First, there are 3 items with 3 dotted links: Item 1
is about an article by Robert Reich: I mostly agree, but guess I am
more radical than Reich; item 2 is about "the
digital age", from which I selected one passage for review (the summary
is that I very much dislike and fear the
internet, will not parti- cipate in any of its extensions, and
would much like to see it disappear (as is), although I very
probably will not live to see this); and item 3
is about the lunatic neofascist Donald Trump (who poses a real threat
that may make the USA into a fully neofascistic state if he gets to be
Second, there is a fourth item with a link - item 4
- to the crisis index, which explains why I have spent a full three
years of daily reporting on the crisis; why I now give this
up although I continue with a considerably smaller crisis series
("the headlights", say); and what I will do with Nederlog, that
also continues, mostly as before, but with more themes and subjects.
The first item is by
Robert Reich on his site:
This starts as
When I was a boy and lost just
about every sporting event I tried, my father told me, “What counts
whether you win or lose but how you play the game.”
Most parents told their kids this.
It was part of the American creed. But I doubt Fred Trump
passed on the same advice to little Donald, who seems to have learned
opposite: It’s not how you play the game but whether you win or lose.
If there’s one idea that summarizes
Donald Trump — his character, temperament, career, business strategy,
and worldview — it’s winning at any cost. That’s the art of the
Playing the game well or honorably
Yes and no (no, because it is not
merely a "part of the American creed": it is pretty universal), but this is better if it is a
Since 1980 at the latest (and probably since the early 1970ies, when it
was started by Lewis
the rich have coordinated their actions to undo democracy,
civilization, equality and justice, and replace it by authoritarianism,
misery for the many and wealth for the few, radical inequality, and
"justice" only for the rich, by a systematic program that they
have largely succeeeded in implementing.
The moral foundation of this program to
reintroduce tyranny of the few rich
are the notions that (i) profit is the only moral value (ii) winning
is everything and (iii) freedom to repress, exploit and degenerate
anyone who is not rich, are all that one needs (as a rich man). And
indeed that is "the art of the deal" and that is modern Republicanism.
Next, here is Reich - very briefly
- on the art of government:
Now that he is the presumed
Republican nominee for the highest office in the land, this view is
Government is about process.
Democracy is about law. The Constitution establishes the rules of the
tacit social contract binds us all together.
This is quite vague, and I also disagree
with the last statement: There was a tacit social contract, but
it was set apart and has been intentionally destroyed
by the rich since 1980, who indeed increased their riches enormously
by destroying the social contract, solidarity, democracy and
The "social contract" implemented by the
rich is an a-social contract: Submit, non-rich, or we use the
freedom we rich acquired by deregulations
to persecute you, prosecute you (in secret, with you not
allowed to say anything to anyone but your lawyer) and destroy you.
There is also this:
When Trump threatens his critics,
saying he’ll “loosen” federal libel laws to sue news organizations
and unleash federal regulators on those who oppose him, he’s not just
He’s endangering our democracy.
Trump is a lunatic fascist. If he becomes
president of the USA, the USA has - democratically, precisely
as Hitler achieved power - become fascistic, and Reich - correctly, in
my opinion - has warned that Trump is a fascist. He is right,
though I prefer neofascism for this latest kind of utterly
destructive and totally uncivilized branch of the fascism of the rich.
But Reich is right that one of the first
things Trump will do as president of the USA is to withdraw the First
Amendment (in practice) and to start libel laws that will allow him to
take down everybody who writes to oppose him.
Then there is this:
Trump is the extreme, but his
candidacy is the logical culmination of years of win-at-any-cost
Yes indeed: His candidacy was preceded by 35
years of coordinated, mostly successful efforts by the few rich to deregulate all the laws that
limited their greed and egoism.
If Trump gets to be president, he will
destroy the USA and he may destroy the rest of the world.
Reich ends as follows:
Yes and no. No, because democracy has
been mostly killed in the USA, if only because the main media are
no longer a free press that honestly investigates and honestly publishes,
but has turned into stenographers for the powerful and the rich,
who simply relay their lies and propaganda to the public while pretending
to do journalism.
The only real
hope for positive change is to make democracy stronger. The Trump
taking us down the road to tyranny.
Yes, in the sense that one has to resurrect both the
social contract, solidarity, democracy and equality and put these on a
renewed legal basis - but the problems are enormous, for (to
name but one thing) 60%
of the American people live in the Middle Ages because they believe in
the literal truth of Noah's Ark story, and know almost nothing about
politics, science, civilization, art, culture or literature. How can
you move this utterly ignorant
majority to sane choices? Also in view of the vast amounts of propaganda
they are fed?
If Trump will become president of the USA, he will get the freedom to
the USA into a neofascist republic. Whether he becomes president, will
depend on the chances of the bankers' rich candidate Hillary Clinton to
2. In the Depths of the Digital Age
The second item is by Edward Mendelson on The
New York Review of Books:
This is a long article that reviews no less
than six books about the digital age and the internet. I will
neither try to excerpt it and quote only one introductory bit
Virginia Woolf’s serious joke
that “on or about December 1910 human character changed” was a hundred
years premature. Human character changed on or about December 2010,
when everyone, it seemed, started carrying a smartphone. For the first
time, practically anyone could be found and intruded upon, not only at
some fixed address at home or at work, but everywhere and at all times.
Before this, everyone could expect, in the ordinary course of the day,
some time at least in which to be left alone, unobserved, unsustained
and unburdened by public or familial roles. That era now came to an end.
As to the first paragraph:
Many probing and intelligent books have
recently helped to make sense of psychological life in the digital age.
Some of these analyze the unprecedented levels of surveillance of
ordinary citizens, others the unprecedented collective choice of those
citizens, especially younger ones, to expose their lives on social
media; some explore the moods and emotions performed and observed on
social networks, or celebrate the Internet as a vast aesthetic and
commercial spectacle, even as a focus of spiritual awe, or decry the
sudden expansion and acceleration of bureaucratic control.
The explicit common theme of these books
is the newly public world in which practically everyone’s lives are
newly accessible and offered for display. The less explicit theme is a
newly pervasive, permeable, and transient sense of self, in which much
of the experience, feeling, and emotion that used to exist within the
confines of the self, in intimate relations, and in tangible unchanging
objects—what William James called the “material self”—has migrated to
the phone, to the digital “cloud,” and to the shape-shifting judgments
of the crowd.
Yes - though I don't have a cellphone and never will have one,
indeed in part because I totally reject "the bright future"
sketched in the first paragraph:
everyone could expect, in the
ordinary course of the day, some time at least in which to be left
alone, unobserved, unsustained and unburdened by public or familial
roles. That era now came to an end.
It hasn't ended for me, for I just refuse
to buy a cellphone, for this reason, and because I do not want to
give my soul, my freedoms, my writings, and my computer to the
extra-ordinarily sick minds of the totally degenerate secret services.
As to the second paragraph:
This mentions four kinds of things the internet brought:
Here are my reactions:
- the unprecedented levels of surveillance
of ordinary citizens
- the unprecedented expositions of
very many lives on social media
- the internet as aesthetic and commercial spectacle
- the sudden expansion and
acceleration of bureaucratic control
Surveillance is (=) the incredible growth of state terrorism and
fascism; exposition of lives on social media is mere pretense of
average idiots who believe the propaganda
they are told; the internet has turned out to be THE tool of
the government, the secret services and the advertisement data- miners:
it is the complete opposite of freedom, creativity,
individuality and privacy; and indeed the main consequence of the
internet is the incredible - fascistic, tyrannic, degenerate,
immoral, illegal - "expansion and acceleration
of bureaucratic control".
Actually, I am very much opposed to all these things.
The only reasons I am using the internet now is to read the
news, to send and receive mail, and to air my views. That is also all
I am going to use it for (and that mainly because the free press is
dead and the post mostly ceased to work).
As to the third paragaph:
Happily, I am 66 (and not a lot younger). Happily,
I don't have children. Happily,
I am a real individual, who is mostly self-created. Since I think the
internet is THE tool for a fascist government to subject everyone to complete
control and to complete propaganda, I refuse to
migrate a phony pretense of an utterly ordinary "self" "to the phone, to the digital “cloud,” and to the
shape-shifting judgments of the crowd".
What I do expect is vastly more fascism, vastly more stupidity,
vastly more propaganda, and vastly more economic and political lies, as
indeed I have seen these increase and increase and increase ever since
I am not an optimist, and I think the present schema of sick
exploitation by the few of the many has to completely collapse before a
better society can be built, if this is possible (for the
destruction of nature and the environment goes on and on).
3. Trump: The Haunting
third item is by
Elizabeth Drew, also on The New York Review of Books:
This is also a long article that I will not
attempt to excerpt or summarize, and of which I will quote only two
The first bit is this:
As a potential president, Donald
Trump presents us with dilemmas and difficulties we’ve never faced
before: his behavior is so out of line with what’s expected, and yet we
don’t know what lies at the core of that behavior. It’s one thing to
say, as numerous people now have, that Trump doesn’t have the
temperament or knowledge or curiosity that are the requirements for
anyone who occupies the White House. Trying to envision the candidate
in the Oval Office and asking whether he belongs there wasn’t required
in any other presidential election in modern history.
In fact, Trump is a lunatic who has
managed to become presidential candidate only because the free
press ceased to exist. It is quite true he does not have
the temperament to be president, nor the knowledge to be
the curiosity that is required in any decent president, but the reason
that a lunatic like he is now is a presidential candidate is not
his doing, but is the cessation of a free press in the USA:
The only papers and media that
give something like the real news are alternative news and fringe
media. The rest doesn't - but the great majority of Americans only
knows the main media, which these days only
give propaganda and lies, while pretending this is "news". 
The second bit is this, that also relates
to my being a psychologist:
Yes, indeed. And I agree he is a
narcissist, indeed with a personality disorder,
The haunting question is whether Trump
is psychologically impaired in some way that makes him unfit for the
highest office this country can bestow. The term “narcissist” is thrown
around quite a lot about him and there can be no doubt that he’s vain
and self-centered—but then so are a lot of people who go into politics.
They love and desire the roar of the crowd. I’ve talked with medical
people, including psychiatrists, about Trump. They all use a somewhat
different term: that Trump has a “narcissistic personality disorder,”
which is a problem several degrees greater than mere narcissism. As
opposed to being simply self-centered and pleased with himself, the
person with the narcissistic personality disorder has an outsized need
for approval, and can become seriously upset if he doesn’t get his way.
This person, the medical experts tell me, tends to be very immature and
has a great compulsion to hit back.
Trump just doesn’t appear to have become a
fully-formed adult. He is unable to deal in nuance or seem to
understand how much of life, and certainly governing, involves
compromise. He wants his way and when he doesn’t get it the result is a
temper tantrum of some sort.
and of the grandiose subvariety
(which is the most dangerous kind). For more, see here.
He also is a psychopath, and those who don't have an academic
degree in psychology can verify he is one in these pages (by a psychologist,
who has made psychopathy his central subject).
4. After 3 Years of Daily Crisis Writing
item is by me and is about the crisis series. The index of the crisis
series is here:
As you can see from it (if you go to Index Nr 1) I started the crisis
series nearly eight years ago on September 1, 2008 (in Dutch).
From September 1, 2008 till June 10, 2013
I published 190 items in it. I probably would have written and
published more about the crisis in the first five years, but I was
seriously diverted from it by the XMRV-story (that turned out to be a
completely false "explanation" of M.E., which is a disease my ex and I
suffer from since 1.1.1979) between October 8, 2009 and October 8, 2011, when I totally gave
up on it .
I did write some more on M.E. - the best
thing in it is a long refutation of
modern psychiatry (yes, I am a philosopher and a
psychologist) that was downloaded a lot but never
answered - and I will continue writing on it, probably once a month as
I did the last years, but I accept my life and the chances for a real
medical explanation have been ruined on purpose by plenty of
psychiatrists (all of whom are sick and degenerate pseudo-scientists: modern psychiatry since 1980 is pure
The main reason I will continue to write
on M.E. is that my condition did pick up considerably with the use of
mB12 and related vitamins and minerals, after 20 years of more
serious illness that were caused by the Mayor of Amsterdam who decided
he could put his illegal softdrugs dealers on the bottom floor
of the house where I lived, whom he and his bureaucrats also defended
for four years in their rights to keep me out of sleep,
to threaten me with murder, and to gas me.
Vitamin mB12 and related vitamins and
minerals did not
cure me, but it did improve my condition from 2012 onwards (rather
consistently also, for over 4 years now), and this is also part of the
reason why I did start on a daily crisis series on June 10, 2013, when I first read
about Edward Snowden.
Since then, I published over a 1000 crisis
logs, which did teach me rather a lot about the causes of the crisis,
which I had tried to elucidate the first time on December 25, 2012, before knowing
anything about Snowden.
I am ending this daily series today.
There are quite a few reasons why I
finished the daily series, but the main reason is simply that it is too
much work: I need my time for doing other things and I don't have
the time I need if I am daily writing reviews of five
articles relating to the crisis, which is what I've done the last three
The crisis series will continue as
long as the crisis lasts and I am alive and well enough to write, but not
in a daily format and not with the considerable
amount of factual detail I gave and reviewed in the last three
I suppose it will be much more
like it was in 2012 and in 2008 and 2009: A part of Nederlog, as before
and since, but not anymore in a daily format, and with much
more space in Nederlog to treat other things.
Then again, I will continue to
write Nederlog mostly in English and I very probably will write about
the crisis at least weekly, simply because it is the most
important social development in the world:
The fully intentional destruction of democracy by the few
rich and by the governments now mostly in their pay, and its replacement
by an authoritarian system of government with enormous
differences in equality and income. (I think that has happened
since 2000, and will continue to happen until the system
collapses economically through greed, egoism and the environment/global
Also, there very probably will be a number
of Nederlogs on more systematic aspects of the crisis that I
mostly learned about during the last three years,
but did not have the time and energy for to treat properly next
to my daily
writings about the crisis.
So the brief summary is: I continue with
Nederlog and I continue with the crisis series but not on a daily
basis, but more on a weekly basis (with the high-
lights of the past week), while Nederlog will change a bit in content
And as far as I am concerned, I
did well in paying most attention the last three
years to the crisis, but I also did well in giving up doing it daily
(after writing more than a 1000 daily files), and indeed feel
considerably relieved, simply because it was a lot of work.
This is not just an American tendency. It also exists in Holland and in
Great Britain, and very probably elsewhere. The main reason is that the
free press ceased to exist: it was first destroyed by a lack of
was next bought up by a few very rich individuals, and has since
changed itself into a conveyor belt of amusement + propaganda. This
also means that any real democracy is dead: A real democracy
requires a real free press, and the
free press is dead.
 My ex and I are ill
since the beginning of January 1979, which also was the first year of
our university studies. We got no help whatsoever since
except by a few good medical people (who are in a small minority of
medical people). We both have IQs over 140 and both succeeded (with
a lot of physical trouble, and without the ability to hear any
lectures) in getting excellent M.A.-degrees in psychology. If
we had been healthy, we both could have earned very much more money
that we did. We could not.
 My ex and I owe the nearly complete lack of any help
mostly to the degenerate frauds who call themselves psychiatrists. I
have never seen a psychiatrist privately; I have never been insane;
and I recommend anyone to avoid all psychiatrists like the very plague:
Their theories are total bullshit - see here and please note that since 1980
the psychiatrist have increased the number of "psychiatric disorders"
from around 50 to 420 - and their
person- alities seem very sick to me, for they don't do
practice fraudulence for private profit (with remarkable financial