
All the talk these days by political pundits, news reporters, columnists, journalists and of course politicians seems directed towards decrying the lack of civility in politics. It is common knowledge that there is a war between the Democrats and Republicans going on. Each side sees the other as bent on destroying democracy, mom, god and apple pie. They have become bitter enemies, and no one is taking prisoners.
To study this problem more, I decided to invoke Santayana’s famous dictum on “those who forget the past.” I fired up my trusty time machine and selected four eras and events from the past where it seems civility had also been called for. As you perhaps know, when journeying to the past, you become invisible and there is no way that you can influence any past events. This is in accord with Novikov’s Self-Consistency Principle. I report on these events in the following four narratives as I witnessed and remembered the discussions.
Moses and Rameses – 1440 BCE
Moses: Let my people go
Rameses: Not on your life
Moses: Then I will bring numerous plagues to smite you Egyptians
Rameses: Go ahead. See if I give a dam
A few weeks later:
Rameses: Look Moses, can’t we be civil about this
Moses: Sure, let my people go
Rameses: Not happening
Moses: Then I will bring a new plague that will strike all first-born Egyptians dead
Rameses: I thought we agreed to be civil. Can’t we discuss this more?
Moses: Let my people go
Rameses: The hell with you Israelites
One week later:
Rameses: Moses, I thought we agreed to be civil. Look how many of my people you killed
Moses: Let my people go
Rameses: To hell with you, get out and don’t come back. I hope I never see you again
Moses: Now that is what I call being civil. Goodbye!

War of Independence – 1776 CE
King George: You dam colonists. Who do you think you are?
Benjamin Franklin: We are your loyal servants my lord, who merely want to be treated with the same rights as Englishmen in your country
King George: You are low-lifes with no civility. I can’t believe you dumped all that tea in the harbor? Furthermore, you don’t even have tea-time each day like we do.
Benjamin Franklin: My lord, the customs in our country are very different
King George: Different my ass, you people are nothing but barbarians
Benjamin Franklin: All we want is to eliminate taxation without representation
King George: Do I look like I care what you want? I’m the king
Benjamin Franklin: I am afraid we are prepared to go to war over this issue my lord
King George: We want to have a civil discussion and you dare to threaten me?
Benjamin Franklin: What does civility mean to you my lord?
King George: Your people stop whining about our taxes and get their asses back to work
Benjamin Franklin: I will bring your message to my people your lord, but I don’t think they will agree
King George: Then we will crush them like we crush all the enemies of the empire. They will be begging for tea and not coffee. You are dismissed.

Somewhere in Mississippi – 1860 CE
Plantation Overseer: How many times Moses have I told you that you can’t run away? You are going to get another whipping boy
Moses: Yes, master
Plantation Overseer: How many lashes do you think you should get Moses?
Moses: I don’t rightly know master
Plantation Overseer: Look Moses, I want to be civil about this, so I am asking your opinion. I was thinking that since it was fifty last time, we should add ten making it sixty. That would be ten for each time you ran away – agree?
Moses: Go to hell!
Plantation Overseer: Mind your mouth boy. I thought we were having a civil and friendly conversation and now you go ahead and insult me with your vile mouth. I am going to add ten lashes to your whipping. That will teach you to be more civil!
Moses: Go to hell!

Hollywood Producers Office – March 15, 2018 CE
Producer: Look Emily, I would like for you to get on the couch and take your clothes off
Emily (Aspiring actress): I don’t understand what taking my clothes off has to do with an audition
Producer: Well, you have heard of “quid pro quo” right? Well, I just want you to do me a little favor and then I will do you a bigger favor
Emily: And what if I refuse?
Producer: Can’t we be civil about this? We are both adults
Emily: I do not plan to screw my way to a role in your production
Producer: I am tired of trying to be civil, now get your ass on that couch
Emily: Unlock the door! Please let go of me!
Producer: Just relax, you will enjoy it more
Emily: Get off me, I will scream!
Producer: Can’t you be more civil Emily? I am just doing this for your own good
Emily: Fuck you, get off me!
Producer: Not until I finish what we started
Emily: Crying
Producer: See it wasn’t so bad was it? Maybe after this we can be more civil to each other
Emily: Screw you!

Well, that is all the time I had for my time journeys. I report the above narratives to the best of my memory. I was wondering what messages or meaning I could ascribe to these events in terms of the problem of civility that I mentioned earlier. I know Trump, McConnell, Graham and many others on both sides of the aisle have all called for more civility in politics.
Somehow though, I question when and where civility is appropriate and where a good “Screw you” is more appropriate. I have no doubt that civility is of value in some circumstances but like any value, perhaps it can be overdone.

Webster’s defines the term Civility as:
1: Archaic : training in the humanities
2a: Civilized conduct, especially : COURTESY, POLITENESS
b: A polite act or expression
If we dismiss the first definition, we are left with courtesy and politeness as being the sine qua non of civility. But I ask, who and when should we be courteous to? Should we be courteous to:
- Someone who is robbing us
- Someone who is trying to kill us
- Someone who is obviously lying to us
- Someone who is preaching hate and fear
- Someone who is taking money from the poor to give to the rich
- Someone who will deny others the chance for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness

There is a time for civility. I have no doubt. But there is a time for anger and indignation.
It takes more courage to stand up to bullies and wrong doers than to merely stand passively by and acquiesce to calls for civility. To conclude, I observe this about civility:
- It is often a call by the more powerful to the weaker to be subdued and humbled
- It can be used to hide evil of the first order and should be suspect
- It is of merit only when it is reciprocated
Beware the Trojan horse! Beware those who want civility without justice, truth and freedom!
Time for Questions:
Are you always civil? When are you not civil? Why? Do you agree that civility is not always a virtue? Why or why not?
Life is just beginning.
“In politics, disagreements between opponents is the sign of a healthy and flourishing democracy. When politicians show too much deference to each other, fundamental ethical questions are likely to get buried and power can go unchecked. Meyer points out that insults are a non-violent way of curbing the excesses of the powerful, and he argues that politics must therefore ‘allow for a boorishness typically at odds with polite society’. Similarly, Kennedy argues: ‘The civility movement is deeply at odds with what an invigorated liberalism requires: intellectual clarity; an insistence upon grappling with the substance of controversies; and a willingness to fight loudly, openly, militantly, even rudely for policies and values….” Meyer, ‘Liberal Civility and the Civility of Etiquette’, 79; Kennedy, ‘The Case against “Civility”’, 85.
The above exercpt is from: “Six Questions About Civility” by Nicole Billante and Peter Saunders, 2002















Once upon a time I had more friends on Facebook. I had both Democratic friends, Republican Friends and friends who cared not one whit about politics. Many of all political persuasions were friends who simply wanted to ignore politics. During the run-up to Trump’s election, I discussed, debated, argued, reasoned and fought with many friends who wanted to support Trump. The results were not pretty. Zero changed their minds. I was angry and frustrated.




My first real hero was Ming the Merciless. He had all the primary characteristics of an evil genius. He was a megalomaniac who wanted to rule the world. He was always smarter than Flash Gordon. He had dozens of minions who followed his every order. He obeyed no rules except his own. And finally, he lusted after Dale Arden who was a pretty hot babe for the time. Dale had wonderful blond curls, a great figure and was into bare midriff before it became popular in the 90’s. Flash was a wimp when it came to Dale but Ming the Merciless knew what he wanted and really went after it. I suppose tying women up today would not be proper but if you are an evil genius it is simply part of the expectations.
My second Hero was Dr. Fu Manchu. A character created by the writer Sax Rohmer. Fu was as evil as they came. He was a brilliant megalomaniac. He obeyed no rules or laws except his own. He was alleged to hold doctorates from four Western universities. Unlike the wimpy college professors who one associates with a Ph.D. degree, there was nothing wimpy about Dr. Fu Manchu. He would not hesitate to murder anyone who got in his way. In the 1932 film, The Mask of Fu Manchu, Fu tells an assembled group of his minions that they must “kill the white men and take their women.” Evil geniuses have a knack for thinking big and ignoring the normal bonds of propriety and civility.
As is usual with evil geniuses, Moriarty was always one step ahead of Sherlock. Perhaps because it was still the Victorian age, Moriarty did not have much to do with lusting after women. There was no kidnapping, tying women up or forced kissing in any of the Moriarty tales. However, Sherlock was not much better in the womanizing category and seemed to be a confirmed bachelor. His main relationship with a woman was with his housekeeper Mrs. Hudson which always stayed platonic.
Von Doom. You must love someone with a name like that. Dr. Doom was evil and ruthless and a certified genius. He had many gadgets and inventions that enabled him to defeat an entire pantheon of superheroes. When it came to bad, he took a back seat to no one. Imagine, someone who would let his childhood sweetheart be savagely sacrificed so that he could gain the power to rule the world. Yes, like most other evil geniuses, Dr. Doom was also a megalomaniac who wanted to rule the world.
I have not had time to describe all the evil geniuses whom I have loved and admired. I have given you only a few of the ones who have punctuated my life. I do not have the space to do justice (sic) to some of my other heroes such as Lex Luther, the Kingpin, The Joker, Green Goblin and of course Sauron. By the way, recently we had a female megalomaniac out to destroy the world. It was quite refreshing to see how Hela kicked Thor’s butt from one end of Asgard to the other. But to bring you up to the present, I have now found perhaps the most evil genius in history. He has all the truly great characteristics of evilness. He is also a genius.



As Americans, we pride ourselves on being the exact opposite of Communists. In America, we have a democracy. To live in a democracy, means that you are “free” to think for yourself. No one living in a democracy can possibly be brainwashed. In America, “the land of the free and the home of the brave” you will only find people who believe in the truth. The truth is that democracy is the holy grail of political systems. It supports everything that is good about life. In a democracy, all men and women are created equal. In a democracy, everyone can succeed if they only have the right desire. Americans will fight and die for this dream.




UNITED STATES



There have been many theories proposed for the policies held by Trump and his Republican supporters. They include “Greed Theory.” The Republicans are held to be greedier than most people and only want to accumulate as much money as they can. Another is “Hate Theory.” This theory holds that since most Republicans are White European in ancestry, they loath and detest any people who are different then they are. This includes Asians, Blacks, Indians, Latinos and any immigrants not from Europe.

About a week later, I was substitute teaching in a Casa Grande High School. I drew an eleventh-grade social studies class. The teacher had left an assignment wherein the students had to find certain terms and concepts associated with the second industrial revolution and write definitions for each of them. Included among such terms as: robber barons, corporations, patents and trusts was the term “Social Darwinism.” One of the students asked me to explain it beyond the simple definition she found on line. I tried to recall my ideas relating to this concept from many years ago. I gave her my explanation and then later I looked up the definition at Wikipedia. I was struck at how well my memory had served me. It was at that point that the proverbial light bulb or blinding light of inspiration hit me. I suddenly realized that the Republican Party was not just trying to create elite systems but they were also trying to build on the theories of Herbert Spencer. The following excerpt explains this theory very well as it applies to many current concepts such as: trickle down theory, privatization, corporate welfare and tax reform.
So, there you have it. Trump and the Republican Party are not greedy, hateful or fearful of others, they simply do not believe that you have a right to anything unless you are also rich and successful and White like they are. Based on the concepts of Social Darwinism, they have the right to whatever you have if they can find a way to take it away from you. If you cannot keep it, that means you are inferior. If you are inferior, you have no right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. According to Social Darwinism, the elite will eventually Trump the poor because they are stronger, smarter and more fit. This will eventually result in a society wherein everyone is fit, and everyone is trying to screw everyone else.