February 27, 2025

    It's been awhile since I've created another post. My interests and emotional attention has been influenced by the USA political turmoil of our times. I am a member of a weekly group of up to seven people who meet every Monday at 1 PM at my home. We have been sharing our personal lives, our interests in various subject, and our understanding and sometimes consternations concerning our countries political problems. The media provides me with various opinions and reported facts that attempt to explain and elucidate the various issues with to me with sometimes clarity and deep concern. 

    Yesterday, I was walking the two and one-half miles into Koko Crater Botanical Gardens on Oahu with my wife and a friend. At the top turn around we were resting and talking when another hiker came up and he shared his concerns. A lawyer from Idaho now retired well traveled and an adventurer we talked about  this countries political turmoil and the current ruling class executive and legislative moves to dismantle our democracy. Our small group of threesome, myself, my wife an artist, and our friend a former United Nations foreign aid grants administrator just talking about our knowledge, concerns, and feelings of anxiety and helplessness. Our retired attorney participant also shared his experiences in hiking with his wife on the island of Lanai. Then he and I talked about some of the hiking opportunities here on Oahu. 

    Lately, in our Monday group a member shares his hopes that our present political and economics turmoil is just the growing pains of a conservative government and that he wants to wait and see for six months whether the rest of the groups concerns are valid or that our democracy will continue with more efficient government. This point of view and sharing of opinions has continued via email and messaging.

    Our online discourse started with our more conservative participants sharing an article by Bill O"Rielly. My responses included sharing some of the quotes of John Bunyan. For example " “This hill, though high, I covet to ascend;

The difficulty will not me offend.
For I perceive the way to life lies here.
Come, pluck up, heart; let's neither faint nor fear.
Better, though difficult, the right way to go,
Than wrong, though easy, where the end is woe.”
― John Bunyan, The Pilgrim's Progress

    I continued by sharing an article about how President Trump through the years has used the term "COMMON SENSE" To justify his actions and attacks on others. I wrote " Here’s an article regarding how we can be bamboozled by a husker peddling COMMON SENSE.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/25/opinion/trump-common-sense-paine.html?unlocked_article_code=1.zk4.Q8Uy.nImWxEg8b--F&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare"  I continued " Here’s a quote from our president.

Many people have told me that God spared my life for a reason,” Trump proclaimed during his victory speech in the wee hours of Wednesday morning. “And that reason was to save our country and to restore America to greatness, and now we are going to fulfill that mission together. We’re going to fulfill that.”

“The task before us will not be easy, but I will bring every ounce of energy, spirit and fight that I have in my soul to the job entrusted to me"

So using this reasoning my conclusion is that God did not intervene in mass school shootings, deaths in flood and fire victims in our recent country’s disasters because he wanted to these horrific disasters? 

Also, if God wants Trump to succeed then those opposed to Trump are against God?

Maybe I’m writing COMMON SENSE! "

    Heather Cox Richardson February 26, 2025 posting fleshes out more news and analysis concerning these issues [https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/february-26-2025?r=e7gdu&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&triedRedirect=true]

    My last reply to this discussion was to share an article by Richard Freidman in the Atlantic Magazine [https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2025/02/optimism-anxiety-action-psychology/681846/ ]. In our Monday group a rejoinder to the main groups concerns about the chaos created in the present administration was "Yes, But" followed by to me was wishful thinking that our President and his followers and "oligarch" political associates really have greater wisdom leaderships to improve our countries finances and services. Friedman describes anxiety and a feeling of helplessness that are shared with him in his practice concerning these issues as a psychiatrist may lead many people to inaction and attempts to shut out their participation in democratic attempts to correct what they perceive as wrong. I wondered whether "yes but" is an example of that. 

    Another avenue to understand some peoples present admiration for oligarchs has to do with their attempts to glorify their work ethic. For example Musk attempts to characterize himself as a very hard worker like others such as Steve Jobs and Tim Cook from Apple, and Jeff Bezoss from Amazon attempt to glorify working 12 hour days six or seven days a week as a positive work ethic. If we all did this we would have more divorces, drug abuse, alcoholism, mental illnesses, and unhappiness. Yet Musk and others declare that their reported work ethic has resulted in their success as billionaires. I'm not convinced it was the work ethic but the scientific and engineering breakthroughs were the factors. Should our country be governed by the oligarchs since they report that they know best for us? Not me. [https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic-justice/is-the-us-witnessing-the-rise-of-oligarchy/]

    Max Weber the pioneer in work and government issues and the person who described bureaucracy forces that create rules and regulations that may not be reasonable also wrote about paternalistic government. Here's what google search of the word paternalism and Max Weber displays " Max Weber generally viewed paternalism with suspicion, aligning with his broader emphasis on individual autonomy and rational action, meaning he would likely see paternalistic interventions as a violation of an individual's right to make their own choices, even if those choices might seem detrimental to them, unless there was a clear justification based on the principle of "the least intrusive means" to achieve a greater societal good. 

Key points about Weber's perspective on paternalism:

• Individual agency:

  Weber's focus on rational-legal authority and the "iron cage of bureaucracy" highlights the importance of individual decision-making and the right to choose one's own path, which would generally be seen as contradicting paternalistic approaches. 
• Social order and legitimacy:

  While Weber acknowledged the need for social order, he believed that this should be achieved through rational and transparent rules, not through paternalistic interventions that limit individual choice based on what someone else deems "best" for them. 
• Context-dependent application:

  Although generally skeptical of paternalism, Weber might have considered limited forms of paternalistic intervention in situations where individuals lack the necessary information or capacity to make fully informed decisions, especially when it comes to protecting vulnerable populations. " Our small group includes one member who has written to his congress representative about his opinions that our present executive and management directives from this government are detrimental to our country.
• 
  

    This post is one of my way to address these issues.

Leonard

            Kahana Valley Nahoa Trail