I thought all we were getting for sacrificing science was a paint job for the border wall, but no! We’re getting more prisons! Overall, crime is down significantly, but we’re expanding the prison system.

There is a small town about 45 minutes south of me named Appleton, that used to be home to a medium security prison that was shut down about 15 years ago. Now the plan is to reopen the facility under ICE control. It’s got 1600 beds, but I’m sure they can easily double that.

I see no advantage to this construction project, except that it means there will be a nearby locus for protests. Also, who knows, as a liberal university professor I could end up staying there sometime! I sure hope they make it clean, comfortable, and luxurious.

The US gutted research institution this year — so far, it has cost us $3.8 billion. What a savings! What shall we do with all that money instead?

How about repainting the border wall? (Which, according to the Cato Institute of all places, doesn’t work.)

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said Tuesday that the entire border wall along the southern border with Mexico is going to be painted black to make it hotter and deter illegal immigration — and she credited President Trump with the idea.

Noem spoke during a visit to a portion of the wall in New Mexico, where she also picked up a roller brush to help out with the painting.

She touted the height of the wall as well as the depth as ways to deter people seeking to go over or under the walls. And then Noem said Homeland Security was going to be trying black paint to make the metal hotter.

“That is specifically at the request of the president, who understands that in the hot temperatures down here when something is painted black it gets even warmer and it will make it even harder for people to climb. So we are going to be painting the entire southern border wall black to make sure that we encourage individuals to not come into our country illegally,” Noem said.

The cost for this brilliant redesign is “between $500 million and $3 billion”, or somewhat more than Kristi Noem’s plastic surgery bill. Try not to think about how many research grants that sum could have funded.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer saw the problem clearly in the 1940s. It’s the stupidity, stupid, and stupidity is more subtle and complex than you might think. Keep the MAGA movement in mind while reading this.

Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice. One may protest against evil; it can be exposed and, if need be, prevented by use of force. Evil always carries within itself the germ of its own subversion in that it leaves behind in human beings at least a sense of unease. Against stupidity we are defenseless. Neither protests nor the use of force accomplish anything here; reasons fall on deaf ears; facts that contradict one’s prejudgment simply need not be believed- in such moments the stupid person even becomes critical – and when facts are irrefutable they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental. In all this the stupid person, in contrast to the malicious one, is utterly self-satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack. For that reason, greater caution is called for than with a malicious one. Never again will we try to persuade the stupid person with reasons, for it is senseless and dangerous.

If we want to know how to get the better of stupidity, we must seek to understand its nature. This much is certain, that it is in essence not an intellectual defect but a human one. There are human beings who are of remarkably agile intellect yet stupid, and others who are intellectually quite dull yet anything but stupid. We discover this to our surprise in particular situations. The impression one gains is not so much that stupidity is a congenital defect, but that, under certain circumstances, people are made stupid or that they allow this to happen to them. We note further that people who have isolated themselves from others or who live in solitude manifest this defect less frequently than individuals or groups of people inclined or condemned to sociability. And so it would seem that stupidity is perhaps less a psychological than a sociological problem. It is a particular form of the impact of historical circumstances on human beings, a psychological concomitant of certain external conditions. Upon closer observation, it becomes apparent that every strong upsurge of power in the public sphere, be it of a political or of a religious nature, infects a large part of humankind with stupidity. It would even seem that this is virtually a sociological-psychological law. The power of the one needs the stupidity of the other. The process at work here is not that particular human capacities, for instance, the intellect, suddenly atrophy or fail. Instead, it seems that under the overwhelming impact of rising power, humans are deprived of their inner independence, and, more or less consciously, give up establishing an autonomous position toward the emerging circumstances. The fact that the stupid person is often stubborn must not blind us to the fact that he is not independent. In conversation with him, one virtually feels that one is dealing not at all with a person, but with slogans, catchwords and the like that have taken possession of him. He is under a spell, blinded, misused, and abused in his very being. Having thus become a mindless tool, the stupid person will also be capable of any evil and at the same time incapable of seeing that it is evil. This is where the danger of diabolical misuse lurks, for it is this that can once and for all destroy human beings.

Yet at this very point it becomes quite clear that only an act of liberation, not instruction, can overcome stupidity. Here we must come to terms with the fact that in most cases a genuine internal liberation becomes possible only when external liberation has preceded it. Until then we must abandon all attempts to convince the stupid person. This state of affairs explains why in such circumstances our attempts to know what ‘the people’ really think are in vain and why, under these circumstances, this question is so irrelevant for the person who is thinking and acting responsibly. The word of the Bible that the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom declares that the internal liberation of human beings to live the responsible life before God is the only genuine way to overcome stupidity.

But these thoughts about stupidity also offer consolation in that they utterly forbid us to consider the majority of people to be stupid in every circumstance. It really will depend on whether those in power expect more from people’s stupidity than from their inner independence and wisdom.

That describes our current situation perfectly. We have a mob of people who have been incentivized to be stupid — unquestioning, dogmatic, full of certainty, and motivated to rationalize every stupid decision by those in power. Reason and evidence will not dissuade them; those are the tools we always considered the best of our civilized minds, and they’ve completely negated them. Stupidity is the secret weapon underlying fascism.

It’s an effective weapon. Here’s a depressing analysis that says, historically, “Once fascists win power democratically, they have never been removed democratically. Not once. Ever.”

The only hints of optimism I’m seeing are from Refuse Fascism — they seem to believe that we can actually fight back and take back the country. I agree with Bonhoeffer that argument and debate are not winning tactics against stupidity. What we need is a strong shock to awaken the citizenry and jar them out of their cultivated dogma, and a mass uprising is the only thing we can do at this point to do that. There is a planned march on occupied Washington DC to protest on 5 November, we should all go.

You might want to tune in to the Refuse Fascism podcast to hear from voices that are simultaneously fully aware of how dire our situation is while also believing that mass action might actually help us overcome the current fascist regime. Check it out. If nothing else, Sunsara Taylor gives an invigorating speech in the first five minutes.

We have to get out of the mindset that we can patch it up in the next election.

The resemblance is uncanny.

Using the pretext of one mugging of one of his cronies, Donald Trump is sending 800 National Guard troops to take over Washington DC. This is a gross overreaction on his part, but it’s his first impulse: let’s use unnecessary force in inappropriate ways to punish a blue city. It’s disgusting, it’s undemocratic, it’s un-American, it’s tinpot tyranny.

The defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, who was among officials joining Trump on the podium, said 800 national guard troops would take to the streets of Washington over the coming week. “They will be strong, they will be tough and they will stand with their law enforcement partners,” he said.

Trump, who lost the presidential election in DC to Democrat Kamala Harris by 86 percentage points, added that he may send in the military “if needed”.

By invoking section 740 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, the president is federalising DC’s Metropolitan police department for the first time in its history. He said he was declaring a public safety emergency and putting the police under the control of the attorney general, Pam Bondi.

Trump vowed to allow police to “do whatever the hell they want” in the face of provocations. “That’s the only language they [alleged criminals] understand. They like to spit in the face of the police. You spit, and we hit, and they get hit real hard.”

No, you cannot allow the police to do whatever they want. The police are required to be bound by the rule of law. Sending in the military is a criminal act by a lawless, corrupt president.

Washington DC is just his test case. If he is allowed to get away with this, you’re next.

The road to authoritarianism is littered with people telling you you’re overreacting.

Tim Walz knows Trump is itching to send the army in to crush all those cities that voted Democratic — you can bet Minneapolis and Seattle and Portland are also high on his hit list.

This is a fascist takeover. React appropriately.

A historical analysis reveals something that will probably sound familiar.

“We can’t put a date on Doomsday, but by looking at the 5,000 years of [civilisation], we can understand the trajectories we face today – and self-termination is most likely,” says Dr Luke Kemp at the Centre for the Study of Existential Risk at the University of Cambridge.

“I’m pessimistic about the future,” he says. “But I’m optimistic about people.” Kemp’s new book covers the rise and collapse of more than 400 societies over 5,000 years and took seven years to write. The lessons he has drawn are often striking: people are fundamentally egalitarian but are led to collapses by enriched, status-obsessed elites, while past collapses often improved the lives of ordinary citizens.

Today’s global civilisation, however, is deeply interconnected and unequal and could lead to the worst societal collapse yet, he says. The threat is from leaders who are “walking versions of the dark triad” – narcissism, psychopathy and Machiavellianism – in a world menaced by the climate crisis, nuclear weapons, artificial intelligence and killer robots.

Do you know anybody who fits that description? Can you think of maybe a large number of people like that?

“History is best told as a story of organised crime,” Kemp says. “It is one group creating a monopoly on resources through the use of violence over a certain territory and population.”
…
it is the few people high in the dark triad who fall into races for resources, arms and status, he says. “Then as elites extract more wealth from the people and the land, they make societies more fragile, leading to infighting, corruption, immiseration of the masses, less healthy people, overexpansion, environmental degradation and poor decision making by a small oligarchy. The hollowed-out shell of a society is eventually cracked asunder by shocks such as disease, war or climate change.”

Uh-oh.

Kemp says his argument that Goliaths require rulers who are strong in the triad of dark traits is borne out today. “The three most powerful men in the world are a walking version of the dark triad: Trump is a textbook narcissist, Putin is a cold psychopath, and Xi Jinping came to rule [China] by being a master Machiavellian manipulator.”

“Our corporations and, increasingly, our algorithms, also resemble these kinds of people,” he says. “They’re basically amplifying the worst of us.”

Kemp points to these “agents of doom” as the source of the current trajectory towards societal collapse. “These are the large, psychopathic corporations and groups which produce global catastrophic risk,” he says. “Nuclear weapons, climate change, AI, are only produced by a very small number of secretive, highly wealthy, powerful groups, like the military-industrial complex, big tech and the fossil fuel industry.

It’s all a bit on the nose, I think.

Maybe I should take up farming as a hobby.

But maybe our leaders will turn out to be enlightened and kind?

I wasn’t mad at Sydney Sweeney before — she was just a dumbass ignorant of genetics and making a commercial for money — but now she has lost all benefit of the doubt. She is a registered Republican.

Richard Hanania, who wrote for white supremacist news outlets under a pseudonym before becoming an above-board conservative columnist, took credit for Sweeney’s affiliation.

“It’s been revealed that Sydney Sweeney has been a registered Republican since June 2024, just a few months after I set off the discourse about her being the end of woke,” he wrote on X. “It looks like I memed into reality the biggest Republican celebrity recruit in years.”

I can’t say she was much of a draw for me before, but now I’ll be even more unenthused about her work. I’ll just visualize Jon Voight in her roles.