What is Behind All These Bullshit Lies and Conspiracy Theories?

11 Aug 2025 5 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , ,

In previous blog posts, I discussed two men whose lives had been damaged by false claims.  The claims misrepresented the truth and attempted to replace truth with slander designed for one purpose.  That purpose in both John Kerry’s case and John McCain’s case was to impugn them because of political positions they had taken on certain issues.  The truth did not matter.  The heroism of both men did not matter.  The damage to them personally did not matter.  The only thing that mattered to the propagators of these insults and lies was whether or not they could successfully destroy the reputation of two men and minimize their political influence.

In the case of Kerry, the lies were intended to prevent his run for the presidency.  In the case of John McCain, the lies were spread to nullify his influence in the Senate and as a revenge for his taking positions that were deemed inimical to his parties preferred interests.

I sent the following query to ChatGPT concerning these attacks.  I am going to post my query and show you the information that this AI engine gave.  Keep in mind, this is a non-partisan reply not attached to any efforts to extort money for any reason.

“What were the motives for the attacks against Kerry and McCain?”

The motives behind the attacks on John Kerry and John McCain—both decorated Vietnam veterans—stemmed from a mix of political, personal, and ideological factors. Despite their military service, both men became targets for smear campaigns, often by fellow veterans or political opponents. Here’s a breakdown of the key motives for each:

🎯 Motives for Attacks on John Kerry

  1. Political Opposition (2004 Presidential Election)
  • Kerry ran against incumbent President George W. Bush in 2004. As a decorated Vietnam veteran, Kerry’s service was central to his campaign.
  • Bush supporters sought to neutralize Kerry’s military advantage, particularly since Bush himself had avoided combat in the Texas Air National Guard.
  • The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth aimed to undermine Kerry’s credibility and patriotism, casting doubt on his war record and medals.
  1. Ideological Resentment (Anti-War Testimony)
  • After returning from Vietnam, Kerry became a prominent anti-war activist, famously testifying before the Senate in 1971.
  • He accused U.S. troops of war crimes—a stance that many veterans found deeply offensive and betraying.
  • Several of his attackers served in Vietnam but not with Kerry, and harbored long-standing anger toward his anti-war activism, not just his candidacy.
  1. Personal Animosity
  • Some individuals in the Swift Boat group had personal disagreements with Kerry going back to the Vietnam era.
  • The group’s leader, John O’Neill, was recruited by the Nixon administration in the 1970s to publicly rebut Kerry’s anti-war testimony—making it a decades-old ideological feud.

🎯 Motives for Attacks on John McCain

  1. Political Intra-Party Conflict
  • McCain frequently clashed with the Republican Party base and right-wing activists.
  • During his 2000 and 2008 presidential campaigns, McCain was seen as a “maverick” who criticized party orthodoxy, making him a target for hardline conservatives.
  • Activists like Ted Sampley accused him of being untrustworthy and disloyal to conservative causes.
  1. Ideological Extremism
  • Groups like Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain promoted conspiracy theories claiming McCain was a “Manchurian Candidate” or communist collaborator—a narrative entirely without evidence.
  • These were often fueled by Cold War-style paranoia and deep distrust of the U.S. government, especially among fringe veteran groups.
  1. Retaliation for POW/MIA Reform
  • As a senator, McCain worked to normalize relations with Vietnam and debunked myths that American POWs were still alive there.
  • This angered POW/MIA advocacy groups, some of whom believed the U.S. government was covering up the existence of missing soldiers.
  • McCain’s efforts were seen by these activists as a betrayal of the POW/MIA cause, despite his own 5½ years as a prisoner of war.

🧾 Comparison of Kerry vs. McCain Attacks

Category John Kerry John McCain
Primary Political Motive Undermine 2004 campaign Undermine Republican campaigns in 2000 & 2008
Core Smear Falsified war record, dishonorable discharge Collaborated with enemy, “Manchurian candidate”
Main Accusers Swift Boat Vets (not same unit) Fringe veterans (Sampley, Kiley)
Real Underlying Motive Anger over anti-war activism Resentment over POW/MIA policies and intra-party clashes
Impact Damaged public perception, coined “swiftboating” Less impact, largely discredited

✅ Final Insight

The attacks on both men were rooted in a combination of politics, personal vendettas, and ideological warfare.  What’s ironic is that both Kerry and McCain were legitimate war heroes, yet were attacked not for what they did in combat, but for what they did afterward—one by opposing the war, the other by seeking reconciliation and compromise.

These smears illustrate how military valor doesn’t shield someone from political weaponization, especially in the age of media spin and partisan polarization.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Conclusions:

Over the last 100 years, the USA has witnessed a decline in morality and ethics.  Greed while always a pervasive influence in the world has become a hideous monster that lurks behind every deal and transaction that is now made.  An entire Congress, Supreme Court and Presidency is run by greed and self-interest.  A so-called Christian nation, Jesus would not recognize many of his followers.  Men and women who want to return the country to a state where money and economics are the raison d’etre for being.  The United States has been coopted by a lust for power and money.  The Shining City on the Hill no longer shines because of its Virtue.  It shines because of the reflection of the sun on its cheap gold plating.

The lack of virtue and morality in the country is amplified and reflected by a media that has one purpose:  Make as much money as it can for its corporate sponsors.  Congress exists for the same reason.  Politicians are guided by the rule as well.  Make as much money as they can for their corporate sponsors.  The man sitting on the throne whom we call a President knows he must also direct the country towards making as much money as he can for his corporate sponsors.  Courts, military, and every legislature in the country are guided by the same rule:  “Make as much money as they can for their corporate sponsors.”

Friends of mine inevitably bring up these questions:  “Can we do anything about it?  Is there any way to get the train back on its track?  What is possible in the face of so much corruption and greed?  What if we keep going in the same direction?  Are we witnessing the end of the American Dream?”

I want to say that hope only disappears when we become hopeless.  Where there is hope, there is possibility.  Regardless of how dismal and dark things are, they can only become darker if we give up all hope.  These are more than, “The times that try men’s souls”.  These are horrible times that destroy hope.  I wonder what history will say in 50 or 100 years about the terrible things America is doing to the world in the name of Exceptionalism and National Pride.

In truth our actions are based on the same evil that destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah.  The same evil that built the Golden Calf.  The same evil that has forever driven the wars and desecrations that infect civilization.  It is a disease that we have never found a vaccination for.  A disease that has gone from a minor infection to a pandemic.  It is a disease for more and more and more.  And the remedy that those infected with it find lies in more money, more things, more power, more and more and more.  And the media spreads the virus and disease with every kernel of its existence.  From text, to video, to radio, to the internet, the one constant is the media beating the drum for more and more and more.  Buy more and you will be happy and successful.  More is the secret for salvation. You will only go to heaven if you have more stuff than your neighbors.

So, buy now and don’t wait. 

Who Spreads More Bullshit?  Fox Propaganda Network or CNN Clickbait Press?

06 Aug 2025 3 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Excuse me for the euphemisms I used in the title for our leading right wing and left wing paid media.  In reality, they are both brothers or sisters in that their “raison d’etre” is to make money.  It is not (as our founding fathers would have hoped) to “educate and inform” the citizenry.

I am taking a short break with this blog from my skewering of some notable conspiracy theories to address the above question since the purveyors of the misinformation, lies and bullshit are even more culpable than the morally corrupt who start these scandalous lies.  In fact, the media are even more guilty since they profit mightily from keeping these conspiracies going.  The following information comes from my favorite muse ChatGPT.

The question of whether Fox News or CNN spreads more misinformation, lies, or disinformation is highly contentious and often depends on political perspective. However, we can ground an answer in media studies, fact-checking data, lawsuits, and journalistic standards rather than ideology.

________________________________________

🔍 Definitions Matter

  • Misinformation: False or misleading information, shared unintentionally.
  • Disinformation: Deliberately false information, spread with intent to deceive.
  • Lies: Knowingly false statements.

________________________________________

🧾 Fact-Checking and Analysis

  1. Independent Fact-Checkers (e.g., PolitiFact, Media Bias/Fact Check, Ad Fontes Media)

Source    Reliability Rating     Bias Rating

CNN          Mixed to High         Lean Left

Fox News  Mixed to Low         Right to Far Right

  • CNN has been cited for mistakes, especially with anonymous sourcing, but generally corrects errors and upholds mainstream journalistic standards.
  • Fox News has a split personality:
    • Its news division (e.g., Bret Baier) tends to be more factual.
    • Its opinion shows (e.g., Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity) have been repeatedly flagged for spreading falsehoods, conspiracy theories, and disinformation.

________________________________________

⚖️ Legal Evidence: Dominion Lawsuit Against Fox News

  • In 2023, Fox News settled for $787.5 million with Dominion Voting Systems for knowingly spreading false election fraud claims after the 2020 election.
  • Internal emails showed Fox personalities and executives knew the claims were false but aired them to retain viewers.
  • This is a clear-cut example of deliberate disinformation for profit and political gain.

CNN has not faced a comparable legal loss for deliberate disinformation.

________________________________________

🔥 High-Profile Incidents

Topic                                       CNN                                                         Fox News

Iraq War (2002–03)     Supported invasion initially                  Strongly promoted WMD narrative

COVID-19                       Mixed messaging                                  Spread vaccine/mask disinformation

2020 Election Fraud   Rejected false claims                             Amplified fraud theories

January 6th                  Framed as insurrection                            Justified actions

________________________________________

📊 Public Trust & Academic Studies

  • Studies (e.g., from MIT, Harvard, Pew) show that Fox News viewers tend to be less accurately informed on major events compared to viewers of CNN, PBS, or BBC.
  • CNN has been accused of bias and sensationalism, but rarely of systematic disinformation.

________________________________________

✅ Conclusion

Fox News, especially its opinion programming, has a more substantial and well-documented record of spreading disinformation and lies, particularly when politically or commercially advantageous.

CNN is not without bias or error, and sometimes engages in editorial framing that reflects a liberal viewpoint, but it has stronger mechanisms for fact-checking, corrections, and accountability.

Conclusions:

My conclusions are to avoid the mainstream paid for profit media as much as possible.  Broaden your media choices to include podcasts, webcasts, articles published by independents or people that you admire.  Be careful of anything or anyone selling you something or who has a profit motive in hand.

  • Do not rely on any one source for your information.
  • Do not accept anything as gospel truth
  • Verify and corroborate any information you receive
  • Be tentative: Move information up a hierarchy as more data and sources support the information. 
  • Be open to other opinions. Do not accept anyone’s word as 100 truth
  • My father used to say “Believe nothing of what you hear and ½ of what you see. I still think that is good advice. 

Debunking Bullshit Lies and Conspiracies – Barack H. Obama

05 Aug 2025 2 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , ,

For the next several days, I am going to wade into some lies and/or conspiracies that were spread to discredit, dishonor and destroy some outstanding people.  If you are tired of hearing about stuff like this, than turn me off for the next week or two.  My intention is to publish one of these stories every few days.  I was motivated to do these stories by some discussions with Trump supporters.  I was amazed at the number of conspiracy theories they believed in that I knew were false.

I am not sure why more information never gets made public to debunk such lies.  It seems the mainstream media does nothing to help dispel the vicious slander and conspiracy theories that are spread about men and women.  People who have the courage to attack a corrupt system or withhold their support for a corrupt system.

Was Obama a US Citizen legally able to run for president?  What was behind the “birther” controversy?

Barack Obama was a U.S. citizen and legally eligible to run for president. He was born on August 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Hawaii, which had become a U.S. state in 1959—two years before his birth. Therefore, he was a natural-born U.S. citizen, which meets the constitutional requirement to serve as President.

What Was the “Birther” Controversy?

The “birther” movement was a conspiracy theory that falsely claimed Obama was not born in the United States and thus was ineligible to be president. Here’s a breakdown of the controversy:

  1. Origins

It began during Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign.

Some of the earliest claims came from fringe political activists and chain emails.

The theory suggested he was born in Kenya, his father’s homeland, and not Hawaii.

  1. Claims and Misinformation

Critics demanded Obama release his long-form birth certificate (he had already released a short-form certificate in 2008).

Despite this, the theory persisted, fueled by blogs, talk radio, and later Donald Trump, who became the most prominent figure promoting the claim from around 2011 onward.  Sadly, the mainstream media ate this bullshit up and helped spread it.  Trump rode the wave of crap to become a media celebrity with a vast number of supporters who were racist and xenophobid and wanted to believe this crap.  Almost all major studies showed that in the first trump election, racism played a major role in trump’s victory.  Some have said “MAGA” was a metaphor for make America White again.

  1. Proof and Rebuttal

In April 2011, Obama released his long-form birth certificate from the Hawaii Department of Health, confirming his Honolulu birth.

Multiple fact-checking organizations (e.g., FactCheck.org, Snopes, PolitiFact) and Hawaii officials confirmed its authenticity.

  1. Underlying Motivations

While it may have appeared to be a legal challenge, many observers and scholars argue the movement was racially and politically motivated:

It played on xenophobic and racist fears, implying that a Black man with a non-Anglo name was somehow “foreign.”

It undermined Obama’s legitimacy and authority, even after he was elected and serving.

Conclusions

The “birther” controversy was thoroughly debunked, but it had lasting effects. It sowed mistrust, polarized political discourse, and elevated conspiracy-based rhetoric in American politics. Barack Obama was and always has been a natural-born U.S. citizen and legally eligible to be President of the United States.

Debunking Bullshit Lies and Conspiracies – John F. Kerry

02 Aug 2025 30 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , ,

For the next several days, I am going to wade into some lies and/or conspiracies that were spread to discredit, dishonor and destroy some upstanding people.  My intention is to publish one of these stories each day.  I am not sure why more information never came out or at least why I was not more aware of the lies concerning these people.  It seems the mainstream media did nothing to help dispel the vicious slander and lies that were spread about these men and women.  Even today, the for-profit media does nothing to discredit the numerous lies and conspiracy theories spread by the current administration.  The following is a another man who was targeted for such lies.

John F. Kerry served with distinction when he was in Vietnam in 1966.  Many people say his war record was faked, and that he did not deserve his medals.  Was he a hero or a fake?

The allegations against John Kerry regarding his service in Vietnam have been the subject of significant political controversy, particularly during his 2004 presidential campaign.  To answer the question—Was John Kerry a hero or a fake?—we need to separate verified facts from politically motivated accusations.

Documented Facts About Kerry’s Vietnam Service

Military Record:

  • Kerry served in the U.S. Navy from 1966 to 1970.
  • He commanded a Swift Boat (PCF-94) in the Mekong Delta in 1968–69.
  • He received five medals:
  • Silver Star (for gallantry)
  • Bronze Star
  • Three Purple Hearts (for wounds in combat)

After the War:

Kerry became a prominent anti-war activist, testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1971, and criticizing U.S. actions in Vietnam.

His speeches included claims that some U.S. troops had committed war crimes—statements that drew strong reactions both then and decades later.

The 2004 “Swift Boat” Allegations

  • During his 2004 campaign, a group called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (SBVT) launched a media campaign accusing Kerry of:
    • Exaggerating or fabricating his military service
    • Not deserving some of his medals
    • Lying about his actions during combat

Analysis of the Allegations:

The SBVT claims were refuted by official Navy records and many of Kerry’s fellow crewmates, who supported his version of events.

Multiple independent fact-checkers (FactCheck.org, the Washington Post, and others) concluded that the SBVT campaign was misleading or false.

The campaign is now widely seen as an early and powerful example of a politically motivated smear, giving rise to the term “swift boating” as a synonym for dishonest political attacks.

Bottom Line: Hero or Fake?

Hero: According to military records, eyewitness accounts, and official commendations, John Kerry served with distinction, was wounded in action, and showed bravery.

Not a Fake: The allegations of fraud or exaggeration have been widely discredited and were part of a partisan effort to undermine his credibility in a political campaign.

Controversial: Kerry’s anti-war activism, including his Senate testimony, was divisive and remains controversial—but that does not negate his military service.  Even today when I attend some activities at Veteran Centers throughout Pinal County, I find veterans who suggest that we should have won the Vietnam War but we were “stabbed” in the back by hippies, liberals and war protestors.  Of course, then as now most war protestors are labeled as communist sympathizers or simply cowards.  

 

 

Debunking Bullshit Lies and Conspiracies – George H. W. Bush

01 Aug 2025 4 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , ,

For the next nine days, I am going to wade into some lies and/or conspiracies that were spread to discredit, dishonor and destroy some upstanding people.  If you are tired of hearing about stuff like this, then turn me off for the next week or two.  My intention is to publish one of these stories each day.  I am not sure why more information never came out or at least why I was not more aware of the lies concerning these people.  It seems the mainstream media did nothing to help dispel the vicious slander and lies that were spread about these men and women.

If instead, you feel like I do that the truth should out no matter how long ago these events happened, than repost, send, share or do whatever you can to help demolish some of these bullshit lies and conspiracies.  I am going to start with the oldest and work forward to end with the most recent.

In 1944, George H. W. Bush was a WW II pilot who caused the death of several of his crew members during a bombing mission. 

Yes, during World War II, George H. W. Bush — who would later become the 41st President of the United States — was involved in a bombing mission during which one of his crew members was killed. However, there’s no credible evidence that Bush caused the death or was at fault.

Background:

  • Date of Incident: September 2, 1944
  • Aircraft: TBM Avenger (a torpedo bomber)
  • Mission: Bombing a Japanese radio installation on Chichijima, a Japanese-held island in the Pacific.

What Happened:

Bush was the pilot of a three-man crew. During the bombing run:

  • His plane was hit by enemy anti-aircraft fire.
  • Despite flames in the engine, Bush completed his bombing run, then bailed out over the ocean.
  • His crew members did not survive. Their bodies were never recovered.

The two men aboard with him were:

  • Radioman Second Class John Delaney
  • Lieutenant Junior Grade William White

With his engine on fire, Bush flew several miles from the island, where he and two other crew members on the TBM Avenger bailed out of the aircraft.  However, one man’s chute did not open and he fell to his death.  The other crew member was never found.  Both Delaney and White were reported as killed in action.

Was Bush Responsible?

No. There is no evidence or suggestion from military investigations or historical accounts that George H. W. Bush did anything wrong. He followed procedure and attempted to save the mission and his crew. He was rescued by a U.S. Navy submarine (USS Finback) and later awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for his actions on that mission.

Controversy:

Some conspiracy theories emerged later, largely without substantiation, suggesting Bush abandoned his crew. These claims are not supported by military records, official investigations, or reputable historians. Most experts regard Bush’s actions as courageous under fire.

In summary:
George H. W. Bush’s two crew members died during a combat mission in WWII, but their deaths were the tragic result of enemy action — not due to any wrongdoing or failure by Bush, who was widely credited with bravery during the incident.

What America May Be Like in the Year 2056

28 Jul 2025 5 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

freedom-is-slavery

The following is an imaginary story I wrote back in January of 2017.  I wrote it at the start of the first trump administration.  I was reflecting on what life would be like in about 40 years under a Republican dominated government.  I just happened to come upon this blog again a few days ago.  After rereading it, I was surprised by how many of these things seem to be coming to pass under the “NEW” trump administration.  I have decided to publish it in the original without making ANY changes at all.  Love to hear your comments and what you think.  

———————————————————————————————————

I live in Republicanville USA.  It is a small town of about 1,500 people in the rural Midwest.  Today in my town, all the women are barefoot and pregnant and all the men are stupid and misinformed.  It wasn’t always this way.  Things started to change about 75 years ago, when Ronald Reagan became President.  My town had always been very progressive and liberal but we started hearing more and more about how we were being taken advantage of by the poor, those on government handouts and those too lazy to work.  The Republicans who in our town had always been a minority began to grow in numbers.  The more we heard about welfare cheats and welfare freeloaders and those on drugs taking advantage of us, the more my town embraced a new concept of democracy.  It was more like “every man or woman for themselves” rather than “all for one and one for all.”

obey-jesus-or-perish

Our U.S. democracy which had always prided itself on a separation of church and state seemed to forget the reason for this partition.  Increasingly, a group called Evangelical Fundamentalists became more popular along with their criticism of many progressive institutions.  Republicanville USA moved more and more to the right.  The concept of unbridled capitalism became enshrined as a religion and many people began opposing “big” government and taxes.  The Republican Party preached that the marketplace could provide for all social, physical and economic needs of U.S. citizens.  My town moved even further to the right.

trump-state-of-the-unionThis conservative trend was already well underway when in 2017, a billionaire real-estate developer named Donald Trump became the 45th President of the United States of America.  In addition to the hard core conservative beliefs of many mainstream Republicans, Trump added the once discredited idea of American Isolationism.  We would now put America first, no matter what.  No more negotiations with other nations unless it was clear that we got the better of the deal.  We would build a big wall to keep Mexicans and other immigrants out and we would renege on our trade deals with China and Europe.  About the only country that Trump liked was Russia.   Eventually, he agreed to give Alaska and parts of Canada back to Russia.

Trump came through on his promises to the Evangelicals that he would make America White again and put women back in the bedroom where it would be okay to grab their pussies whenever you wanted to.  Minorities were targeted for deportation and women libbers promoting abortion or equal rights for women were arrested in wholesale sweeps and sent to special detention centers for chronic complainers and protesters.

I would like to describe in somewhat more detail what my town is like now in 2056.  Things are a lot different than when I was born in 2017.  I will divide my discussion of these changes into three areas:  Family, Education and Social Issues.

Family:

another-day-in-paradiseI am 39 years old and have two children.  I have never worked (at least outside of the home) as women have not been allowed to work since 2022 when they passed the “Women in the Home Law” as it was popularly called.  The Federal government passed the law and it was ratified by every state and municipality in the nation.  Some places tried to hold out but the government cut off all funding to them until they capitulated.  This law effectively outlawed women working.  It also barred women from the military.  Ten years later (2032) they passed the “Mandatory Birth Act.”  This bill proscribes that every woman (physically able to) must give birth to at least two children.  Any woman who reaches the age of 32 and still has not given birth to two children is forcibly removed to a National Birthing Center where she will be artificially impregnated and kept confined until she has had at least two healthy children.  Sickly or unhealthy children are sent to Disposal Camps where they are “recycled” per official government propaganda.  No one is quite sure what happens during recycling but the children are never seen again.

Many gay women resisted the Mandatory Birth Act and the National Suicide Rate went up dramatically.  The “Fathers” (as our political leaders are now called) made it very clear that the country would be better off without such deviates.  Since women were no longer allowed in politics, the leaders of the nation decreed that they would all be called “Fathers” instead of being referred to as politicians or legislators as they once were called.

My husband works at a local mill where they make t-shirts for Japan, China, Brazil and some of the more developed t-shirt-workersnations.  Since banning imports of such items, we have created millions of jobs making goods that were once made in low wage countries.  The demand for such goods has skyrocketed but now we are providing them.  Unfortunately, the wages and education needed for such work is still low.  My husband did not finish high school but most men in our town do not.  The Fathers have repeatedly stated that real men don’t need higher education.  (I will talk more about education later.)

When my husband is not working, he spends most of his time watching football, baseball, basketball, golf or hockey.  I ammen-watching-game not allowed in the living room when his sports are on except to bring in some beer or chips.  This does not really bother me much as I have plenty to do with the kids, housecleaning, cooking and all.  I have my own TV in my sewing room where I can watch any of the approved programs for women.  We have 30 different “Women Only” channels where I can learn more about cooking and cleaning and how to be a good wife. There are some good romances and family drama stories that are occasionally on.  I look forward to watching these when the kids are in bed.

Our two children, Mary and John are 12 and 15 respectively.  Mary is in a finishing school for girls where they are preparing her for being a mom and wife.  She takes subjects such as homemaking, cooking, cleaning and parenting.  She has one more year to go before finishing school.

When Mary turns 14, she will be eligible for marriage.  Her name will be put in a marriage registry.  If she is lucky enough and pretty enough, some up and coming town Father will select her for a wife.  Men who qualify due to income levels are allowed to have up to five wives.

woman-vacuum-cleaning

My son John is not in school any longer and he works part-time.  The Fathers decried that girls did not need schooling after the age of 13.  John hopes to get a job in the t-shirt plant where his dad works when he turns 16.  He quit school because we could not afford a private school for him.  Only the rich kids in town go on to education beyond the 10th grade.  Private schools are very expensive and the Fathers do not believe in funding education any more.  It has been emphasized that education is an elitist program that creates class divisions and makes some people feel more entitled than other people.   Most young men in our town will work in one of the mills or plants.

Education:

anti_public_education_propaganda_by_8manderz8-d5xz1cj

I have already talked about some aspects of our education system today.  Basically, most people do not believe in higher education anymore.  It is only for the rich.  All funds for public education were cut in 2035 when they passed the “Private Education Act”.  Most folks now send their kids to private schools through the 8th grade and then find work for their children after that.  Girls will be shortly married so school is not thought to be that important for them anyway.  They can learn whatever they need to be a good wife on the “At Home Wives Channels.”

students-1920-1950-9_jpeg

Boys from families with lower incomes can opt to go to privately funded vocational schools to learn such trades as t-shirt making, sneaker making, jewelry making, gun repair, taxidermy, and many other skills that might be in demand.  There is still some funding for such programs that is available for lower income families.  All public colleges have been closed now.  As I noted earlier, such schools were decried to be elitist and the Fathers were unanimous in un-funding them.

Boys from wealthier families go to the more prestigious private schools where they will learn such skills as: Leadership, Accounting, Business Development, Entrepreneurship and Medicine.  Law was abolished as a field of study in 2030 with the passage of the “No More Lawyers Act.”  This act basically made lawsuits illegal thus dramatically decreasing the need for lawyers in the U.S.

Courtrooms abolished “adversarial” trial procedures with the “No More Lawyers Act” and replaced the old-fashioned method of two people arguing trials with modern Computerized Forensic Tomography.  Using CFT, a cross section of the case and evidence pro and con is presented to the jurors.  All the available facts and data are reviewed and jurors vote on the verdict.  Trials are much more efficient and there is no need for lawyers.

Anti EducationLibraries are now mostly museums.  With the passage of the “Books Only Lie Bill” in 2038, all funds to public libraries were cut.  The Fathers decried that books did nothing but cause trouble and stir up discontent.  Anything citizens really needed to know could be found on the “Citizens Channels” offered by the government Department of Public Wisdom.  There are over 100 of these channels which are available on public TV.  They are on 24/7 and offer many programs for good citizenship.  Some of the programs are:

  • Disciplining your children
  • How to take proper care of your guns
  • Disciplining your wife
  • Obeying your supervisor
  • Getting along with co-workers
  • Obeying authority
  • Keeping a clean house

Social Issues:

Social issues or problems (as some people thought of them) have been mostly eliminated in our town.  Our Fathers banned minorities in 2040 with the “America for Whites Act.”  Under this act, no immigrants or people of color can live in the same community as White people.  In 2041, they passed the “Christian Only Act” making Christianity the official Religion of the USA.  All other religions were banned along with atheism and agnosticism.  The “Mandatory Religion Act” in 2042 made it a felony crime not to attend a Christian church every Sunday.

In our town, there is only one church now.  It the Fundamental Evangelical Christian Church for Christ.  We have two pastors who are both well versed in Old Testament theology.  They are fond of saying that “Heaven is for the obedient, the disobedient will all go to hell.”  We are taught that Jesus will come again before the end of the century to judge the living and the dead.  The good folks will go to heaven and the bad will burn forever in the flames of hell.

We still have crime in our community but not very much.  It is severely punished with public floggings, beatings and hangings.  Criminals are banished to work rehabilitation camps for hard labor.  Drugs are still a major problem but the new “One Strike Act” passed in 2050 decried that anyone caught with an illegal substance would face a mandatory life sentence at a penal colony somewhere in the South China Sea.

immigration-reform

Gay men still can be found but homosexuality can be punished under the “2045 Purity of Purpose Bill” with mandatory castration.  Boys are encouraged to be manly and any evidence of femininity in our boys is severely dealt with.  Our town brought back “town stocks” a few years ago, to punish any boys or men caught in homosexual activities.  These punishments plus the threat of castration have decreased the rate of homosexuality considerably in our community.

Well, I could tell you a great deal more about life in our town in 2056, but I have cleaning and cooking to do.  Furthermore, if anyone knew I was writing this I would be in big trouble.  Under the “Against Propaganda Law” passed in 2041, no one may criticize the government, any Fathers or any laws without official authorization from the local town council.  I could be publicly flogged or worse for saying these things.  Thus, for now I will just hide this away.  I don’t mean to be either a coward or a complainer.  Our Fathers say this is the Golden Age of America and that we are living in the greatest Christian country in the world.  Who am I to argue?

Time for Questions:

Are you living the good life?  Do you live the life you dreamed of?  Do you think you have a right to your dreams?  Do you think other people also have a right to their dreams?  How much authority do you think a government should have over your dreams?  What kind of dreams do you have for your children?  What do you call progress?

Life is just beginning.

“No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal.  He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves.  But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?”  ― George Orwell, Animal Farm

What Would Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams and Thomas Paine Say if They Were Alive Today?  Opinions Expressed by ChatGPT!

12 Jul 2025 12 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,


I often wake up at night pondering the imponderable.  A few nights ago, I woke up wondering what my favorite Founding Father would think about things today if he were alive.  I refer to Thomas Jefferson who despite much of his hypocrisy, I still admire very much for his intellectual foundations of democracy.  Thus, I got out of bed and decided to see what ChatGPT would think about this question.  While I was at it, I included queries for Samuel Adams and Thomas Paine whom I also admire very much.  I put the following query to ChatGPT.

In 500 words or less, what would Thomas Jefferson have to say about the present state of politics in America today?

If Thomas Jefferson were to assess the present state of American politics, he would likely express both deep concern and guarded hope. As a champion of liberty, limited government, and the diffusion of power, Jefferson might be alarmed by the hyper-partisanship, concentration of wealth and influence, and erosion of civic virtue that marks much of today’s political climate.

Jefferson valued the free press and an informed citizenry as bulwarks against tyranny, but he would likely be troubled by the rise of misinformation and the deep polarization stoked by media echo chambers. He warned that a republic could only survive if its people were educated and vigilant. Seeing voter apathy, low civic trust, and widespread political cynicism, he might fear that the American experiment was straying from its foundational ideals.

He would likely criticize the influence of large corporations and special interests on lawmakers, calling it a form of “elective despotism” — where private power manipulates public policy. Jefferson was wary of centralized banking and would probably see today’s economic inequality as a threat to republican balance and self-rule.

On the other hand, Jefferson would also recognize the enduring strength of constitutional institutions, the resilience of democratic dissent, and the diversity of political participation as hopeful signs. He believed in the capacity for peaceful revolution and renewal. The activism of young people, the vibrancy of civil society, and ongoing debates about rights and justice might stir his belief that the republic can still be revitalized.

Ultimately, Jefferson would urge Americans to remember that liberty requires effort — that every generation must “refresh the tree of liberty” not with violence, but with active engagement, moral courage, and public service. He would remind citizens that they are not subjects but sovereigns, and that the preservation of democracy depends not on leaders alone, but on the people themselves.


In 500 words or less, what would Thomas Paine have to say about the present state of politics in America today?

If Thomas Paine were alive to witness the present state of American politics, his response would likely be fiery, uncompromising, and full of both indignation and inspiration. As the passionate voice behind Common Sense and The Rights of Man, Paine championed radical democracy, social justice, and the power of ordinary people to overthrow corrupt systems. He would likely view today’s political climate as a betrayal of the revolutionary ideals he once fought for.

Paine would be outraged by the degree of economic inequality and political influence held by the wealthy elite. He warned in his time about the dangers of monarchy and aristocracy—today, he might argue that America faces a modern version: oligarchy. The dominance of corporate money in elections and policymaking would, in his eyes, amount to tyranny in a new form.

He would be sharply critical of political parties that prioritize power over principle and create divisions that distract from the common good. Paine believed that government should serve the people, not entrench the power of a few. He would condemn the partisan gridlock, deliberate misinformation, and what he might see as cowardice among leaders unwilling to stand up for justice and truth.

Yet, Paine would not despair. He believed deeply in the ability of people to rise, to demand reform, and to create a more just society. He would likely praise movements for racial justice, labor rights, climate action, and economic fairness as modern heirs to the revolutionary spirit. He would call on Americans to shake off apathy, to recognize their power, and to demand a government that works for all, not just the privileged few.

In Paine’s words: “We have it in our power to begin the world over again.” He would challenge today’s citizens to do exactly that.

In 500 words or less, what would Samuel Adams have to say about the present state of politics in America today?

Samuel Adams, the fiery patriot and master organizer behind the American Revolution, would likely view the present state of American politics with a mix of alarm and rallying fervor. As someone who believed that liberty must be constantly defended against corruption, tyranny, and apathy, Adams would be deeply concerned by the erosion of civic trust, the rise of special interest power, and the complacency of citizens in the face of growing dysfunction.

Adams saw government as a sacred trust, meant to reflect the will and virtue of the people. Today, he would likely condemn the influence of money in politics as a betrayal of republican principles, calling out lobbyists, corporate donors, and elected officials who prioritize personal or partisan gain over the common good. He would regard political leaders who manipulate public opinion with lies or fear as dangerous enemies of liberty.

He’d also take issue with the widespread civic disengagement and low voter turnout. Adams believed that public virtue—active, informed participation in the republic—was the cornerstone of freedom. He would likely warn Americans that rights not actively defended are rights easily lost, and that freedom requires both vigilance and sacrifice.

Yet, ever the agitator for liberty, Adams would not retreat into pessimism. He would find hope in grassroots activism, community organizing, and movements that hold the powerful accountable. He would see in these efforts the spirit of the Sons of Liberty reborn.

Adams might close his remarks with a challenge: “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.” That time, he would say, is now. And he would call on Americans to rise—peacefully but boldly—to restore the republic.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I was very impressed by the above observations.  They mirror what I thought each of these great men would have said.  However, as I lean towards pessimism and given the present state of America, I tend to be very pessimistic, I would have totally overlooked some of the positive attitudes that each of these men expressed as well as some of the optimism they spoke of.  I am very grateful to ChatGPT and Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine and Samuel Adams for their ideas.  I only wish I could share these thoughts with all Americans today.

Is there any possibility, these ideas would make any difference to at least some of the followers of our erstwhile King and Dictator? 

The Hypocrisy of Paywalls and Political Campaign Contributions

01 Jul 2025 8 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

If you are reading this blog, you will note two aspects of my blog that might be salient.  They will only be evident if you look closely.  First, there is no Paywall.  I charge nothing for my ideas.  Indeed, I encourage you to repost or use my ideas in any way that you think will help others.  Second, there are no advertisements.  I take no money from anyone.  I am beholden to no companies or corporations for endorsements or financial remuneration.  If anyone does not like what I say, that is their problem.  I am free and unencumbered to say it and you are free and unencumbered to read it.  No sixty second sound bites from anyone before you can plow ahead.  The only thing standing between you and my blog are the bits and bytes of your computer and the speed of your Internet provider.

I point the above out because it seems that what is obvious to me is not obvious to others.  Most of us know that the USA and its government is seriously broken.  It is dysfunctional, immoral and often now illegal and unconstitutional.  What is the biggest reason for this?  Simple.  Money and greed and the power that money begets.  Ergo, if money is as they say, “The Root of All Evil,” than how can asking for more money fix the problem.  Imagine if there were a fire burning in your house and you tried to put it out by throwing money on it?  Well, that is what too many people are trying to do. 

Many bloggers are now asking for money before you can read their blogs.  How do they think this will make the world a better place to live?  “Just give me money and I will share my wonderful ideas with you.”  In other words, I am no different than the other greedy people who would sell their souls for a few dollars.  I will sell my soul for a few bucks that I might make on Substack or some other place that allows Paywalls and advertisements.

If you think advertisements are benign and harmless, you are delusional.  Madison Avenue and the corporate advertising machine are the number one brainwashers in America.  They are the primary reason that people keep spending and spending.  Madison Avenue exists to convince you that you are inadequate and that if you only buy product X, it will make you feel better and bestow happiness on your life.  Than, you only have to keep buying more to stay happy.  Think of the junk that you see every day trying to be sold to suckers to make their lives better.  Not a prophet in history preached that you can have a better life by having more things.  If you support advertising, you support this evil concept.  The foundation of this concept is Greed that pervades Corporate America. 

Next we have politicians whose every message ends with “SEND MONEY” or “DONATE TO MY CAMPAIGN.”  I cannot think of a campaign or revolution in history from Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Napoleon or Lenin to Toussaint Louverture or Simon Bolivar or Gandhi or Martin Luther King, where they sent out advertising brochures or flyers asking for money.  They might have solicited soldiers or workers but people not money were their primary objectives.  You of course can argue that some of these individuals had the power and resources of the state to fund their campaigns.  I concede that this is true.  However, it is equally true that without people, their campaigns and revolutions would have failed. 

I see too many politicians who seem to believe that if they can only get enough money, they will then be able to buy enough advertising to convince you to vote for them.  Nothing could be more stupid.  Harris spent nearly a ¼ billion dollars more than trump during the last election and obviously lost.  All of her money did her no good.  Nor did her celebrity endorsements.  The day after the elections, the DNC asked for more money to defeat trump’s policies.  [By the way, the CEO of ActBlue, the major fundraiser for the Democrats has a gross salary of approximately $500,000 dollars a year and many of the senior executives of this organization make well over $100,000 dollars a year.  This should dispel any notion you have that fundraisers for the Democrats are benevolent donors of their time and energy.] 

The other point about advertising’s power to convince anyone to vote concerns the voters themselves.  How many trump supporters do you think changed their mind because they listened to or watched a Harris ad?  How many Harris supporters do you think changed their mind because they watched a trump ad?  And what of the thirty-three percent of the people who did not vote?  A percentage that has remained roughly the same since the first voting in this country for George Washington.  Nearly every election a third of Americans DO NOT vote.  How many of these non-voters do you think changed their mind to vote for either Harris or trump because of some cute and slick campaign ad?  Madison Avenue is laughing their asses off every time an election comes around because they are the real winners.  As the famous pianist Liberace once said, “I am laughing my way all the way to the bank.” 

Einstein once made the following two profound statements, “We cannot solve our problems with the same level of thinking we used when we created them” and “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”  We are insane if we think that we are going to change a system based on greed and money by simply donating more money to fund this system.  What could be more preposterous than this idea?

Let me tell you a little story that I experienced in the 2024 election.  A friend of ours from church decided to run for state representative.  I believe that she supported many if not most of the same policies that I do.  However, I told her as well as others that I knew that I was no longer donating money to any campaigns.  We discussed some ideas at church one day and she was very pro-education, and she thought that we needed to do some things differently.  I gave her my personal card and said that I would be happy to discuss some of my ideas on education.  Ideas that come from teaching for over fifty years now.  A short time later,  she sent me a notice that she was hosting a campaign fund raiser.  I was somewhat surprised since I thought I made it clear that I would not donate money to anyone for a campaign effort.  I was also perplexed since I believed in her ideas, and I admired her personally.  Nevertheless, I decided to stick with my convictions about money.  Instead, I sent her an email saying that “I would not make campaign donations, but I would help her with phone calls, signs or going door to door.” 

Weeks went by.  She never called to set up a time to talk to me about my theories of changing education nor did she ever call to ask me to help physically in any way with her campaign.  Come the election, she lost to her opposition by a 56 to 44 margin.  Would my help have made any difference, or would my money have made any difference?  I have no way of knowing.

During the last election, being a guest on Podcasts has emerged as a new political tool and strategy.  Judging by the election results, it might be a better strategy than the money wasted on advertising.  Some data concerning the visibility that trump gained versus Harris gained on podcasts are as follows:

Trump’s Appearances/Mentions: Trump has been mentioned in or appeared on a significantly larger number of podcasts, with nearly 70,000 instances, according to Brookings, citing Ivy, a podcast discovery service.

Harris’s Appearances/Mentions: Kamala Harris has been mentioned in or appeared on a little over 12,000 podcasts.

This data suggests that while Trump had more individual podcast appearances, he also received substantially more mentions or coverage across a wider range of podcasts compared to Harris.

A friend of mine recently called me up to tell me that I should watch Pete Buttigieg on a Podcast called Flagrant with a guy named Andrew Schulz.  Four other young males of various ethnicities all casually dressed flanked Shultz and Buttigieg as they engaged in a casual banter about life and politics.  

This podcast and others of the same ilk have nothing in common with the traditional sit-down interviews that politicians used to have on shows such as Face the Nation and 60 minutes.  Podcasts like Flagrant are like sitting in your buddies living room or Arizona Room and slurping a beer while casually discussing the latest news.  Not a woman was present in the room with Buttigieg and Schulz.  A more or less macho image pervaded the discussions.  It seem macho has become the new norm in politics today.  Women can stay in the kitchen while the men hide out in their man caves and solve the problems of the world. 

My friend had asked me what I thought of Buttigieg?  I wondered if Pete attending all the macho podcasts was a strategy to set him up for the next election cycle.  I have a strong belief  that is what his advisors are endorsing.  Perhaps this is being pragmatic and simply making maxim use of the new media.  Or perhaps it is targeting the same demographic that trump targeted so successfully.  I queried ChatGPT to get the results on trump’s election demographics.  They were as follows:

| White voters (overall) | ~80–82% | Largest core group |

| White evangelical Protestants | ~82% (South); 43% of R base | Bedrock core |

| Latino voters | 46–48% | Historically high support |

| Latino men | ~54–55% | Key swing within Latino support |

| Asian Americans | ~40% | +10-point gain since 2020 |

| Black voters | ~15% (esp. young men) | Doubled since 2020 |

| Young men | ~55–56% | Social media & influencer effect |

A reasonable estimate for men aged 25–45 is around 50–52% of Trump voters.  This is a majority of his voting demographic.  Watch some of the podcasts like Joe Rogan and Flagrant and you tell me what demographic you think they are appealing to.  Rogan averages 11 million views on Spotify and Flagrant (numbers are not public) is estimated to be in the millions with specific episodes passing ten million viewers.  With these numbers and the type of audience watching, millions of dollars on traditional advertising is a waste of time and money. 

Conclusions:

  • If you want change in this country, do not send another dime to a politician.
  • If you must fund any politician, look at how many PACs they subscribe to or how many lobbyists they get funding from. Stay away from any with PACs hiding under aliases like Patriots for Freedom or Americans for Liberty.
  • Donate your time and talent to anyone running for public office before you donate any money.
  • Encourage your choice for office to get out there and talk to people. Consider people for office who can really relate to the people who are going to elect them.  Any lawyer that went to a private high school and then graduated Summa Cum Laude from Harvard and never served a day in the military or put in an honest days work is not likely to know the problems of the common people. 
  • Think before you send any money to anyone. What are they going to use your money for? 
  • If you have a printing press in your house or a tree that grows money, than by all means, send all the money you want. While you are at it, could you send me a few thousand dollars? 

P.S. 

Before I could even get this blog up, I get an email from the new “Hero” of the Democratic Party telling me the following and three times asking for donations in the same email.

“We will need to run the largest and most effective campaign in history for the next five months to win the general election. The same billionaires whose money could not stop us before, are throwing everything they have to crush us. And the reality is that they are going to go after any candidate in any part of the country who dares to champion working people.”

“What we will achieve together sends a message across America — and throughout the world.

The people can topple political dynasties. The people can build coalitions. The people can win.

So join our movement and lets bring forward a new generation of leadership.

In solidarity,”

Zohran Mamdani

Donate »

Donate »

ChatGPT Political Analysis of the Next Three Weeks Following the US Bombing of Iran

21 Jun 2025 11 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , ,

Here is a realistic 3-week scenario following a U.S. (or Israeli/U.S.-backed) bombing of Iran’s nuclear enrichment sites. This projection assumes a limited strike—targeting key facilities like Natanz, Fordow, or Isfahan—rather than a full-scale war. It also assumes no immediate regime change in Tehran.

🔥 Week 1: Shock, Assessment, and Initial Response

Day 1–3: Aftermath of the Strike

  • Iran confirms the bombing, accuses the U.S. (and possibly Israel), and vows retaliation.
  • Images of destroyed facilities emerge. The regime uses this to unify internal dissent and condemn “Western aggression.”
  • Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and the IRGC declare that Iran will “respond at a time and place of its choosing.”
  • Oil prices spike sharply (10–20%) due to fears of escalation and threats to the Strait of Hormuz.

Day 4–7: Iran Responds Indirectly

  • Proxy attacks begin:
    • Rockets fired at U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria.
    • Possible drone attacks on Gulf infrastructure (e.g., Aramco facilities in Saudi Arabia).
  • Cyberattacks ramp up—U.S. financial institutions, oil pipelines, or water utilities may be hit.
  • Hezbollah increases alert status in southern Lebanon; Israel prepares for possible northern front flare-up.

🔥🔥 Week 2: Retaliation and Global Response

Day 8–14: Asymmetric Escalation

  • Strait of Hormuz Incident:
    • Iran attempts to seize or disable an oil tanker or mines a portion of the sea lane. U.S. Navy increases patrols.
    • Insurance rates for shipping skyrocket; some companies suspend traffic through the Gulf.
  • Missile or drone attacks on Israel may occur via proxies in Lebanon or Syria.
  • Iran announces its withdrawal from the NPT and ends cooperation with the IAEA.
  • U.S. embassies in the region face protests or limited violence. Evacuations begin in unstable areas (e.g., Iraq, Lebanon).

Global Diplomatic Reaction

  • U.N. Security Council convenes emergency meetings, but permanent members (Russia, China) back Iran’s right to respond.
  • European allies urge restraint but face domestic protests over perceived U.S. recklessness.
  • China and Russia increase energy imports from Iran, attempting to buffer sanctions.

🔥🔥🔥 Week 3: Brinkmanship or Stabilization

Day 15–21: Critical Crossroads

Two scenarios could unfold:

Scenario A: De-escalation (40% chance)

  • Backchannel diplomacy via Qatar, Oman, or Switzerland opens dialogue.
  • Iran agrees to “limited retaliation” in exchange for no further U.S. strikes.
  • The U.S. and EU explore a new diplomatic framework—one that includes regional actors like Saudi Arabia and Turkey.
  • A global coalition calls for a new nuclear deal—but it may be even harder to achieve than the JCPOA.

Scenario B: Continued Escalation (60% chance)

  • A U.S. base suffers major casualties from a proxy missile barrage.
  • Israel launches strikes on Hezbollah or targets IRGC units in Syria.
  • Iran threatens all-out war if attacked again. Military activity intensifies around Hormuz.
  • Gulf states (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain) enter high alert, and the U.S. begins moving naval strike groups into the region.
  • A wider regional war becomes a real possibility—though all sides remain cautious of going “over the edge.”

🧭 Strategic Implications

  • Iran may emerge stronger in domestic politics, despite the strike, by unifying nationalist sentiment.
  • The global economy suffers, with energy markets roiled and major supply chain uncertainty.
  • Diplomacy is damaged for years; no near-term nuclear agreement will be politically possible in Iran.
  • The risk of miscalculation is extremely high—especially if any party overestimates their deterrence or underestimates their adversary’s resolve.

It will be very interesting to follow this AI analysis and see how closely it approximates events in the next three weeks. Let us all pray that it does not result in a third world war.

Defying tyranny: Maria Ressa on journalism under authoritarian rule

04 May 2025 9 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I heard this interview with Maria Ressa on Arizona Public Radio the other morning.  Her experiences in the Philippines with another would be dictator point the way the USA under Trump and his fascist thugs and sycophantic Republican cohorts has us headed.  This is one of the most interesting and insightful interviews I have heard in the past ten years.

Journalist Maria Ressa, the co-founder of the Filipino investigative news site Rappler, a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and the author of “How to Stand Up to a Dictator,” speaks with The World’s Carolyn Beeler. They discuss how the slide toward authoritarianism Ressa experienced firsthand in the Philippines is eerily similar to what she’s seeing today in the US. — “The World,”  May 1, 2025, By Joy Hackel

When journalist Maria Ressa, the co-founder of the Filipino investigative news site Rappler, looks around America, she sees something all too familiar.

Ressa, a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and the author of “How to Stand Up to a Dictator,” spent much of her career working as a journalist in the Philippines — and she was arrested several times during the reign of the authoritarian leader Rodrigo Duterte for the outlet’s reporting, often calling out corruption under his regime.

“I’ve learned through the six years of Rodrigo Duterte that you have to hold the line,” Ressa said. “You have to fight for your rights, because every day you do not, you lose more.”

Ressa said that Duterte tried shutting down Rappler in 2018 and 2019. And then, something shifted for the author.

“I had 10 arrest warrants in a little over a year,” she said. “Those cases have continued until today.”

Ressa has won eight of the 10 cases against her, with two more trials to go. And she’s not the only one awaiting trial.

Nobel Peace Prize winner Maria Ressa of the Philippines gestures as she speaks during the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony at Oslo City Hall, Norway on Dec. 10, 2021. A Philippine tax court on Wednesday, Jan. 18, 2023 cleared Ressa and her online news company of tax evasion charges she said were part of a slew of legal cases used by former President Rodrigo Duterte to muzzle critical reporting.

“So, Rodrigo Duterte is gone,” she said. “This president was the first social media president elected with Facebook’s help. But he was just arrested in March on an ICC arrest warrant for crimes against humanity, and he is in prison in The Hague. My president — who tried to jail me — is in jail, waiting trial.”

Ressa joined The World’s Host Carolyn Beeler to discuss what aspects of her experience she found most relevant to understanding how a free press can come under attack.

Carolyn Beeler: How does it feel to know that he is in jail and you are still free? And do you reflect on the role that you may or may not have played in that?

Maria Ressa: We kept doing our jobs, which is our investigative reports, chronicling, putting faces to the countless people who have died in a brutal drug war. This is now being used as evidence. Our reporter, who worked on the drug war, wrote a book that became a New York Times bestseller. It’s called “Some People Need Killing.” That’s a phrase that one of the vigilantes told her. The president, like this US president, makes the attack very personal, but I think what I learned is — and I’m an old-style journalist in this sense — I treated the office with respect. And I just had to have faith that doing the right thing is the right thing; that you hold on to the line, that you do not compromise. There are many, many instances, and business will lead the way. We were not the first news organization attacked. We were the third. The first was the top newspaper, the second [was] a top television station. The top newspaper, within two weeks, said it would sell to a friend of President Duterte. It ultimately did not. But the top broadcasters, a news group I managed for six years, tried to negotiate with President Duterte, and they lost their license to operate. And even though Duterte is out of power, they cannot broadcast anymore.

So, there’s still damage done to the free press, even though he is sitting in jail?

It’s not even that there’s still damage. It’s that the damage that is done will not go away without tremendous effort. So, the largest broadcaster doesn’t have a license, a franchise to operate today. And those licenses, those franchises were given to the friends of Duterte. It is creating an oligarchy. Really, it’s leading to kleptocracy. I think the two things — and this is actually very similar here — you need to look at the level of corruption. You need to look at who benefits from this. You know, you look today at what’s happening in America, not many news groups covered the pausing of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which is essentially the US government saying in order to be competitive, go be corrupt.”

You’ve been drawing these comparisons about what happened in the Philippines and what is happening now, it sounds like, in the US. But I’m wondering, to what extent is it really fair to compare those two very different countries?

Two very different countries, but we have a constitution that is patterned after the United States. Three co-equal branches of government, a bill of rights that’s almost exactly like the United States. And what happened in the Philippines — tell me if this sounds familiar — is a very strong executive that pushed it and co-opted the Legislature, so he gained tremendous power, and the judiciary that ultimately, in the end, crumbled. Well, I can’t say things like that publicly, let’s just say that’s someone else’s analysis. But look, if the checks and balances don’t work, and what you realize is that checks and balances of institutions depend on the men and women who will carry those out. And when a president — and I can again say from the Philippines, President Duterte appointed 6,000-plus people to top positions — when they are both ignorant and arrogant and use their power to kill the checks and balances, use their power [to get] more power, then you have nothing stopping this. And we watched our history change in front of our eyes. It’s déjà vu.

Duterte was a very popular leader. What was it like battling such a popular leader when you were so often up against him?

Look, in Cambridge Analytica, the country that had the most-compromised accounts was America. The country with the second-most number of compromised accounts was the Philippines. The Cambridge Analytica whistleblower said that they tested tactics of mass manipulation in our country, and when it worked, they used it in [the US]. So, popularity is manipulated. When you have a design of a platform, when it’s designed for maximum profit to keep you scrolling, what they found out is — and they have this data — when lies spread six times faster — that’s an MIT study from 2018, this is on social media — when lies spread six times faster at least, and then in our data, we saw that if you lace it with fear, anger and hate … it spreads virally. That’s part of the reason our values are upside down. We are rewarding the worst behavior of people. So, popularity, I guess, what I’m saying here is I think a lot of this is manipulated.

But was Duterte able to do what he was able to do because of his popularity? How did that play into his ability to control and take so much power?

He wouldn’t be able to do all that if we didn’t have a behavior modification system at his disposal [social media]. Data is gold. Data is how we’re manipulated. And data privacy with the new technology — and I’m not just talking about social media AI, but also generative AI — with this new technology, is a myth. This is how control happens. And this is part of the reason, look … The technology companies have figured out how to hack our biology, to hack the way we feel, which changes the way we think, which then changes the way we act in the real world and ultimately, changes the way we vote. So, back to your question … he’s really popular. Really, really popular? Why? How? Were our fears manipulated to make it that way? Were we given false promises? Was democracy crushed in that popularity?

Based on your experience, what do you see as the most-effective ways to tackle the attack on data privacy, this onslaught of misinformation that may or may not be manipulating our feelings about our government or our leaders?

I’ll step back to say what we did. We survived six years of Duterte. Our lawyers told me, you know, “You’re crazy,” in some of the things that we did. But, I think you just, you hold the line, right? Because by coming at you through taxes, through business ends … the businesses themselves and news organizations are under attack anyway. So, I think the first is that when you hold the line, you get out of the virtual world. In 2012, when Rappler was first formed, my elevator pitch getting there was [that] we build communities of action and the food we feed our communities is journalism. So, we moved into the physical world. And what we found was that our communities are there. Fear is real. And in the Philippines, there were an average of eight dead bodies dumped every night in Metro Manila. One team going out every night, and we would just have this. It’s meant to instill fear. And we saw that when people are afraid, that fear spreads, but so does courage. And so, every time I got arrested, and another arrest warrant, every time, we’d get a spike of crowdfunding, and I was just telling my sales team who was celebrating, I was like, “This is not a sustainable business model, right?” But what I learned is this: form these communities, number one. Number two: it’s got to be laws. This is not a speech issue or a freedom of the press issue. This is a safety issue. It’s like you’ve put poison in the water system, and you have to make sure people on these platforms have agency. And frankly, the biggest question in the world today is whether rule of law still exists, right? Whether it’s in the physical world, where you have attacks against sovereign nations, invasions. Uh, yeah, Putin? Hello. And then you have the virtual world, where you have impunity happening as well.

You’ve said that you’re feeling déjà vu here in the US. You’re teaching at Columbia right now. How would you characterize the civil society response to the changes the Trump administration has made in its first 100 days?

Like deer in headlights. Not enough, although I would say the court system is kicking back now, and then what did we see last Friday? A judge was arrested in Milwaukee. Again, these are intimidation tactics. In “How to Stand Up to a Dictator,” the question I asked is a really simple one, because the tech has allowed individual targeting. So, the question there is, “Individually, what are you willing to sacrifice for the truth?” Without facts, you can’t have truth. Without truth, you cannot have trust. The only government that exists without trust is a dictatorship, right? But if you don’t have these three, we have no shared reality. So, everything hinges on us living in the same shared reality, and I think this chilling effect is here. And in the past, I used to say, in the Philippines, it was Siberia.

Hello, Americans.  Where are you?

End of Interview

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

I could add my two cents to this interview, but I could not do justice to the comments that Nobel Laureate Ressa makes.  Perhaps, the most striking thoughts I gleaned from this interview are as follows:

  • “The only government that exists without trust is a dictatorship.”
  • “You have to fight for your rights, because every day you do not, you lose more.”
  • “What you realize is that checks and balances of institutions depend on the men and women who will carry those out.”

Here is a bonus for my blog readers today.  I heard this sickening suck up speech to trump on the anniversary of his first 100 days in office.  This will either have you laughing your butt off or running to the toilet to barf.   Imagine the difference between Bondi and Ressa?  

Previous Older Entries Next Newer Entries