Peter Navarro was Trump’s Trade Advisor. He recently published a book about his time in the Trump administration. The most fascinating part of his book, according to those who have read advance copies, is his story about the plan to overturn the 2020 election and keep Trump as president. He has done several media interviews. This account in Rolling Stone relies on this one that appeared in The Daily Beast.
Navarro says that he and Steve Bannon orchestrated a plan called the Green Bay Sweep.
Rolling Stone writer Tim Dickinson writes:
The plot sought to keep Trump in office by exerting maximum pressure on Vice President Mike Pence to block the certification of the Electoral College votes from pivotal swing states, by drawing out the proceedings on national television for as long as 24 hours. “It was a perfect plan,” Navarro told the Daily Beast. “We had over 100 congressmen committed to it…
Navarro is a Harvard-educated economist whom Trump tapped, originally, to escalate his trade war with China. But as coronavirus struck, Navarro’s role at the White House expanded to include pandemic response, in which he pushed the quack treatment of hydroxychloroquine. By the bitter end, Navarro was compiling cockeyed dossiers of (now-exhaustively-debunked) allegations of election fraud — “receipts” Navarro believed justified tin-pot measures to keep Trump in the White House.
So what was the Green Bay Sweep? The plot, Navarro writes, was named after a famous football play designed by storied 1960’s NFL coach Vince Lombardi, in which a Packers running back would pound into the end zone behind a “phalanx of blockers.”
For the 2021 Green Bay Sweep, Navarro writes, Bannon played the role of Lombardi. The plan was to have members of the House and Senate raise challenges to the counts of Electoral College votes from six pivotal battleground states.
“The political and legal beauty of the strategy,” Navarro writes, is that the challenges would force up to two hours of debate per state, in each chamber of Congress. “That would add up to as much as 24 hours of nationally televised hearings,” Navarro writes. The hearings would enable Republicans to “short-circuit the crushing censorship of the anti-Trump media,” Navarro hoped, and broadcast their Big Lie that Democrats had stolen the election “directly to the American people.”
The goal was not to get the election overturned on Jan. 6. Instead, they aimed to create such a spectacle that Pence would be forced to exercise his authority as president of the Senate to “put the certification of the election on ice for at least another several weeks” while Congress and the state legislatures pursued the “fraud” allegations. The dark particulars for how Trump would remain in office after that are not spelled out, and Navarro did not immediately answer an email seeking clarification. But he writes that the Green Bay Sweep was the “last, best chance to snatch a stolen election from the Democrats’ jaws of deceit.”
The problem with the plot was that its success hinged on “Quarterback Mike” — and Pence wasn’t solidly on board. Navarro writes that he tried, with Trump’s backing, to brief Pence on his claims of election irregularities, but that Pence was kept off-limits by his chief of staff, Marc Short. (Navarro seethes that Short was part of the Koch brothers wing of the GOP, having previously worked for a nonprofit backed by the Kochs. When Short came to work for the vice president, Navarro writes, “it was like the Soviet Union taking over Eastern Europe. As an Iron Koch Curtain fell over the vice president, the only way you could speak to VPOTUS was to go through Short.”)
Regardless, Jan. 6 began auspiciously — to Navarro’s view of things. He told the Daily Beast that Trump was “on board with the strategy,” which he writes also had the backing of “more than 100” members of Congress. Navarro elaborated that the plan started off “perfectly” as Congress opened the proceedings to count Electoral College votes. Rep. Paul Gosar objected to results from his home state of Arizona, seconded by Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas — an action that received standing applause from GOP colleagues in the chamber.
Navarro insist that the violence at the Capitol disrupted the Green Bay Sweep by putting pressure on Congress to conclude the certification. Apparently he forgot to tell Trump to keep his mob away from the U.S. Capitol, because Trump urged them to march to the Capitol, told them that they had ”to fight” or they would lose their country, and egged them on to do what they did: Storm and ransack the Capitol. some were chanting ”Hang Mike Pence,” which may have stiffened his spine.
Two things are clear: Mike Pence didn’t deliver for Trump, Bannon, and Navarro, and Trump was too dumb to remember that he was not supposed to send his mob to disrupt the Congressional proceedings.
You gotta see it to believe it (but these days that’s not considered proof):
Sorry, here’s the actual interview, the clip above was commentary on it.
These guys writing books is ironic, since the vast majority of Trump supporters, like Trump himself, don’t read.
cx: These guys writing books is ironic, since most Trump supporters, like Trump himself, don’t read.
Maybe someone will make a movie from the book.
Peter’s Big Adventure
Greg, where is the audio for Navarro?
I don’t have any problem with audio. Perhaps it is muted for you, that sometimes happens. Hover over bottom of screen and click speaker icon.
Greg, I see only photos, nothing on bottom of screen.
I wish that this host had freaking given Navarro the opportunity to talk. he keeps talking over him, and that’s a disservice to listeners. They need to hear what the coup plotter says, but Navarro gets out a couple words and then is shouted over.
Not in the second clip, in my opinion, Bob. The first one was edited in the beginning. Love the proved connection between Bannon and Navarro on the phrase “Green Bay sweep.”
See my post below. It is appalling how good the far right is at getting people to legitimize the most ridiculous narratives.
Peter Navarro’s very first line in this interview sets up the entire false narrative that is about as absurd as the naked emperor admiring his fabulous new clothes:
“Tonight I’m the January 6 guy. The In Trump Time book shows unequivocally that both Stephen K Bannon and President Trump should be exonerated of any violence on Capitol Hill on January 6…”
And the MSNBC anchor still doesn’t get it. He does the same thing that NYT reporters do. First he legitimizes the totally false narrative by asking questions in which that totally false narrative is first conceded.
“Emperor, why do you think those clothes are nice when they are ugly?” “Emperor, do you realize those clothes could be harmful to your subjects if they wear them?”
Let’s accept the following: Navarro and Bannon and Trump are absolutely responsible for that attack on the Capitol. They are guilty. The media needs to stop taking seriously this ridiculous idea about how they had this different, arguably “legal” coup, that was their real plan.
This entire farce is to start a totally different “both sides” argument — “was this Green Bay plan legal or not legal?”
Bannon and Navarro WANT the discussion to be “was the Green Bay plan legal”?
The only focus of the media should be that Trump and Bannon and Navarro wanted and needed to stop the certification at the Capitol and scare Mike Pence on January 6, and that’s why they arranged this violent insurrection that they assumed the media would report in their usual “both sides equally valid” fashion/
That guy obviously wants everyone to know about how great his plan was.
Reminds me of G. Gordon Liddy of Watergate fame.
He’s openly bragging about a coup plot.
Undoubtedly because he knows he got away with it and will never be prosecuted.
G. Gordon Liddy was prosecuted and did jail time.
But that was in a time long ago in a galaxy far far away.
Not that they had many reservations this time, but next time, they will have absolutely no compunctions about seizing dictatorial control because they have seen the utterly inconsequential response.
Navarro is a Harvard educated PhD economist who also touted hydroxychloroquine to treat covid
Why am I not surprised?
I expect this is the equivalent of a PR book tour. He’s probably got a best-seller here. Brilliant plan foiled? Oh well, cash in on it. Does it make me and my conspirators look bad? [insert Alfred E Neuman shrug]
Bannon laid out the whole plan, in some detail, on his podcast.
A traitor, enabling a traitorous president.
And there has been zero accountability for the leaders of this.
And there won’t be.
Which will set things up for the next time, which will be successful.
Yup. January 6th was the Beer Hall Putsch. But Hilter was at least sentenced for his crime (though the punishment was little more than a spa treatment, like what Trump’s guy Acosta gave Epstein).
And that’s what was missing from President Biden’s speech today, as admirable as it was: the call for accountability by those at the top of the planning of this insurrection.
I never thought I would live to see a President of the U.S. attempt to instigate a coup, fail at this, and then get away scot-free. It’s like something from a tragi-farce.
It makes me wonder what more evidence could possibly be needed to charge sedition. They talk about all that they did before 1/06 to stop the transfer of power, yet they haven’t been indicted.
Off but very on topic be that education or Democracy . Sorry Linda it ain’t just Catholics(lol) .
Mainstream media writes about Christian nationalism again – how unusual (sarcasm). Tribalists from the other major conservative U.S. religion finding vindication by media’s selective headlines and reporting – what a surprise.
When the public knows the conservative religious sect of Steve Bannon, John Eastman, Michael Flynn (advocates for a single U.S. religion), 6 of the SCOTUS judges (mandated tax funding for religious schools and exempted religious schools from civil rights employment law), Pat Buchanan,…., when the public knows who takes credit for school choice in state legislatures like Indiana… when msm takes on the connection between anti-abortion laws/ anti-CRT and religion (read the founder of the 1776 PAC, Ryan Girdusky’s interview with Pat Buchanan posted at the Buchanan site), the incredibly few people who heed Pope Francis’ warnings, people like me, can let up.
Just curious – what was the make-up of the religious in Germany who selected the Fuhrer
With respect to your final sentence only, I think that is a question that cannot be answered because conditions between the presidential election of 1932, where Hitler came in a distant second, and the parliamentary elections of March 1933, which were the first and only after Hitler became chancellor (which is not voted on by the population). Neither is an accurate barometer of the times and the only conclusion I would draw from them–aside from the actual events that happened–is that the 1932 election proved that Hitler was supported by a large minority of voters (even smaller than that of the Idiot, which is not a comforting thought).
On the other hand, one can assume widespread support in the Catholic and Protestant churches for a more conservative/reactionary government. We know that many of the voters that voted for Hindenburg in 1932 were relatively quiet when Hitler assumed power and they supplied the people and products needed to go to war. Anecdotally, the Rev. Martin Niemöller, whose “they came for…” quote made him famous, even admitted that in the first years of Nazi rule, that he and his congregants weren’t particularly concerned when communists and left-wing reporters and politicians were rounded up and taken out of society. It was only when it started to affect him and them that they started to take notice. And then it was too late.
There is even ample evidence that some Jews believed they could weather the political storm of Naziism because of their businesses or escape easily right up until Kristallnacht. The novel The Passenger tells the story of what one of them might have experienced.
Greg
Thanks very much for the history. And, I appreciate your earlier clarification about appeasement vs. denial.
The American left must find the mechanism to stop fascism’s advance. If public schools are a bellwether for U.S. democracy, identifying its enemies is critical.
Buzzfeed’s, “Welcome to Idaho…”, 10-22-2017, about Kootenai County, 3rd largest county in the state, shows us how communities become extremist. A second article in a different publication updated the situation in Oct. 2021, “Kootenai County GOP Chair doubles down on support for antisemitic candidate (for school board)”. The election’s outcome – the GOP County Chair’s choice narrowly lost. Reportedly, before the candidate moved to Idaho, he had also said it was a mistake to allow women to vote.
Buzzfeed described the 125% growth in population in the past two decades that drove the County to the right, “thousands of ex-LAPD officers, doomsday preppers, ‘traditional Catholics’ and far right evangelicals moved there for cultural homogeneity.” The article mentions Reach America, a Christian leadership organization that advocates for pulling Christian kids from public schools and also an organization, American Redoubt, that is in thinly populated areas of Mt., Id., Wy., Or., and Wash.
Linda
I wont disagree. I am asking you to be an equal opportunity critic. With few exceptions “History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes” .
Joel-
Thanks for the quote.
We’ll agree to disagree that “fair” is msm reaching 80,00,000 voters with its narrative about Trump supporters and me reaching voters in single digits with info that voters almost never read and coupling it with equal time repeating msm’s report.
Fair might be a SCOTUS balance of jurists from religions that have a majority of liberals or who have no religion.
Movement toward fair would be msm describing state Catholic Conferences and school choice legislation. When that happens, we’ll both be happy? Or, should msm try to find an equal network of influence by some other religious group?
Greg
I replied. It’s in moderation.
” Highly relevant to this paper, researchers have generally
concluded that the geographic pattern is highly complex, with both strong local and regional elements, and that the correlation between the vote and compositional factors (e.g. religion, class,
occupation, gender) is relatively weak.”
Click to access nazi_long.pdf
There are a great many attempts cited i this article to establish patterns of pro-nazi voting in Weimar Germany. I do not have the expertise to pass judgement on the above summary by the authors, but the footnote trail of the above article is good by historians standards.
One author found rural areas more likely to vote for the Nazis in 1932. My own belief is that generally threatened people tend to support totalitarian leadership more readily.
Roy
Thanks for the info.
Research in contemporary America found that religion is a primary factor in voting. The U.S.’ thinly populated areas have more conservative religion, disproportionate electoral college influence and more egregious gerrymandering.
Fear is the goal of messaging from conservative religion, the GOP and Russia. The first two want people steered to authoritarianism.
With the aide of Charles Koch, the apocalyptic element is doubling down. The third, Russia, wants a weakened America.
Influencers from the following groups failed to anticipate what a ratcheting up of fear in an America with a hollowed out middle class would lead- 1) the moderate wing of the GOP party (2) the two primary religions and (3) right wing business.
Linda– your last para in the 1/7 8:42am post is spot on. I elaborate further down under general comments to get more margin space.
It’s ironic that Navarro sees Koch as his adversary. Perhaps this will lead to a libertarian/right wing break up. One can only hope…
But he has a “Get Out of Jail Free” card for his continuing blaming of George Soros for everything. Translation: anti-Semitism by proxy. Adjacent, even.
My thought as well
From what I read, Koch doesn’t love Trump in substance or style, differs drastically on trade policy, and didn’t support Trump re-election effort.
Yeah, but both have turned to the dark side in their own way….
Linked below is a welcome expression of principled opposition to the January 6 Capitol riot, although few of this blog’s readers will give him any credit and will resort to the ad hominem that is a staple here . As we justly condemn Trump for his actions last year, let’s also remember that Hillary Clinton still claims that Trump did not legitimately win the 2016 election, and Stacey Abrams still claims that she is the rightful winner of the 2018 election for Georgia Governor. Eviscerating democratic norms is sadly a bipartisan venture these days.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/republicans-jan-6-responsibility-anniversary-riot-storm-capitol-trump-protesters-investigation-11641417707?mod=hp_opin_pos_5
Thanks for the comic relief. Oh, I’m sorry, was that an ad hominem attack. Telling the truth about right wingers and education privatizers only seems like an ad hominem attack to the recipients of legitimate criticism. Quote: Eviscerating democratic norms is sadly a bipartisan venture these days. end quote No, no, no, absolutely wrong. There was NOTHING bipartisan about the attack of Jan. 6th. It was all a right wing phenomenon and quite unique in US history; the plotters and participants were Trump acolytes and supporters. When did a gang of Democrats storm the Capitol and try to stop the workings of Congress? There’s no comparison to the criminality (on a massive scale) of the Jan. 6th rioters/thugs/miscreants.
Can you explain, please, how “ad hominem…is a staple here”?
Imagine, if you can, a truly left wing attack on the seats of American power. To visualize this, you have to go back to the letter bombs mailed to important figures in the government in 1919. This touched off the Red Scare, and Att. Gen. A. Mitchell Palmer led raids of thousands of immigrant places, deported people for association with supposedly left-wing organizations, and ultimately began what would be the FBI. It led to the immigration restrictions of 1924 which stood until the late 60s and to a climate of anti-communism in which an entire country neurotically grouped Communism with labor unions and advocacy for the poor.
Anyone who does not believe that the US is a country that mainly sits on the right side of the political spectrum should learn a lesson from the basic freedom accorded to Trump and Bannon. Had they been truly on the left wing, does anybody imagine that they would not today be in jail?
Roy-
Thanks for making the salient points.
If Trump’s failed coup attempt on January 6th had been led by Antifa with white, brown, yellow, and black faces in the crowd attacking the capital, instead of fascist MAGAism (mostly white led my extreme right racist militias), the capital police would have been ordered to open fire, even using miniguns if they had them, and mowed that fictional leftist mob down.
Hillary, unlike Trump, conceded immediately, even though she won the popular vote.
Some good questions there, with obvious answers. Unfortunately, way too many people are incapable of thought exercises like this.
FLERP,
that’s a great quote. Who wrote it?
That’s Karl Rove, in the WSJ article linked in the thread.
That WSJ article by Karl Rove is behind a pay wall save for the first paragraph. From the first paragraph: Karl Rove quote – “Both parties are guilty of overwrought denunciations of their political opponents.” end quote There’s nothing overwrought about denouncing Trump and the death cult known as the GOP. Just doing normal descriptions of Trump and his wacked-out party might seem overwrought but that’s because Trump and the GOP are so extreme and off the charts crazy. President Trump, what a concept, what an awful reality. Let’s hope that never happens again, once was enough.
Reasonable minds can debate whether both parties are sometimes guilty of overwrought denunciations of their political opponents. Anyway, I didn’t paste that quote because I want you to endorse Karl Rove or every word he wrote. I just thought the thought experiment was well-put.
“overwrought denunciations” are not why Trump, Bannon and Navarro and the Republicans who supported them are guilty.
They are guilty because they fomented a violent attack whose sole purpose was to prevent a properly elected president from taking office by threatening a Vice President who would not play along with them and preventing a certification of the election.
They are guilty because they already got something the losing candidate in 2016 didn’t get — checks of voting machines, comparisons to paper ballots, hand recounts, checks of any duplicate names and endless legal challenges in which they had multiple opportunities to provide any of this supposed “evidence” and never did. Not one time.
The only thing the voter fraud investigations found was a handful of right wing Trump supporters using dead people’s ballots to double vote for Trump.
This is like someone saying that some parents get “overwrought” because their high school senior has to read Toni Morrison’s Beloved and some parents get “overwrought” because Ethan Crumbley brought his assault weapon to school and gunned down a bunch of students in cold blood.”
All in service to normalize the unprecedented attempt by the Republicans in power to end democracy so they can remain in power. There is no precedent, even at the turn of the 20th century when radical socialists took violent action.
Those socialists were not directed and encouraged by powerful politicians who wanted them to act violently so the powerful politicians could stay in power even though they had lost an election.
ok.
Good sense from Karl Rove. That’s an excellent thought experiment. I repeat: Hillary accepted defeat as soon as she lost the electoral college. Even though she had 3 million votes more than Trump, she conceded. Unlike Trump, she did not try to stage a coup.
Tony Jeffries
If White voters had their registrations disqualified in the percentages as Blacks in 2018 or any other number of disenfranchisement’s of Black voters in Georgia.
They would not show up with flagpoles at these state legislatures but rather with AR15s .
If you want an ad hominem attack here it is —————————- Fill in the blank. And ” ask me if i care “
Tony Jeffries– OK I couldn’t read the paywall WSJ article, but you have one good point. As recently as 2019 WaPo article on a Sept ‘19 CBS interview, Hillary claimed Trump was an illegitimate president—attributed to voter suppression, to [Russian] hacking, to “false stories.” She apparently didn’t even mention Comey’s last-minute pre-election claim [unfounded] which probably cost her the election… Still, not a good look for Hillary. But that’s about it. I find nothing supporting Stacey Abrams ever claiming the election for GA govr was illegitimate [despite lots of scurrilous voter suppression activity suggesting it in fact was]. She just went about her biz, which helped get a couple of Dem GA Senators elected.
Hillary’s sour grapes in a 2019 interview are not enough to suggest claiming “election results are faux” is a bipartisan thing. As we have observed for the last 16 months– counting from Trump’s prez debates claiming upcoming election would be fraudulent due to covid mail-in votes– including absurd re- & re-counts in swing states– plus red-states’ new voter-suppression laws thinly disguised as preventing voter fraud– is a REPUBLICAN THING– not bipartisan.
And these are the true, blue American ‘patriots’??? The ongoing back stabbing at all levels is a poor showing of this nation. Very poor…
“poor showing”
Trump-supporting Jeremy Faison, a top Tennessee lawmaker, who has 5 kids, attended his son’s basketball game recently, a competition between two Christian schools. Faison is quoted as saying, he wanted the game’s referee to fight with him. The provoking incident was the ref’s technical foul call against both teams for unsportsmanlike conduct. The ref said, Faison tried to “de-pants” him. Faison has apologized for being a fool. Unfortunately, that doesn’t retract the foolish decisions he’s made as a GOP representative in voting for state laws.
The GOP- performative faux masculinity- adolescents who haven’t transitioned into adulthood.
This was all over Nashville news last night. Video of Faison trying to pull down the Refs pants. Living in the buckle of the Bible belt, I learned a long time ago from my fundamentalist friends: You do not want to referee a church league ballgame. Those guys are out for blood.
Right, peskyvera. Navarro is an example of one mini-level of these layered self-promoting-self-enriching political cockroaches working together temporarily while it serves their agendas, then back-stabbing their way to more bucks &/or power [him via a tell-all book]. A sign of how corrupted our govt has become, now attracting the most venal level of “civil servants.” (/s/)
The “civil servants” are the people who are in government as a career. They don’t come and go. They don’t write “tell all” books. They keep government running no matter which party is in office.
Don’t believe Bannon and Navarro.
They had multiple plans. The storming of the Capitol didn’t detract from all their other plans.
The only thing that prevented all their other plans was that the news media grew a spine and decided not to report on this as a “both sides” issue.
The only thing that prevented this was that regular people shot video of the violence that went so viral that the cowardly news media interviewing “very important people” telling them that “both sides have a point” looked like idiots and were ignored.
The insurrectionists were there because Bannon and the neo-fascist money interests behind Trump wanted them to be there, and if they wanted Trump to stop them at the beginning, they would have ordered him to and he would have obeyed.
Just watching the footage makes that clear. There were a number of people in the crowd who looked like professionals on a mission, and they are fairly easy to identify among the followers and wannabes.
It was an organized insurrection. Whatever other plans Bannon and company had were dependent on that insurrection. They just didn’t expect the condemnation to be quite as strong.
^^Remember without that mob, at the Capitol, the certification of votes would have simply happened sooner that day. Bannon and Navarro’s plan absolutely needed that mob to storm the Capitol to stop the certification.
Maybe Bannon and the powers behind him thought that since Pence wasn’t doing what they ordered, having the insurrectionists threaten him would get him to change his mind.
But I don’t understand how Navarro’s ridiculously laughable story about how this supposedly “alternate plan” in which he and Bannon and Trump are totally blameless because a random mob just decided to storm the Capitol is believed by anyone.
That alternate plan needed Pence to play along and he wasn’t, and once the votes were certified on January 6, this supposed alternate plan was irrelevant. Bannon and Navarro know that.
Let’s stop buying into more right wing propaganda. The only part of the plan that didn’t work is that the so-called liberal media cowed into always legitimizing whatever false narrative Bannon said was “fair and balanced” couldn’t present the January 6 insurrection in the way Bannon assumed they would given how often the NYT Washington bureau journalists have a long history of covering news using exactly the narratives Bannon wanted.
That independent footage went viral and that changed the false narrative that Bannon surely assumed would rule.
If you’re saying: the narrative that Bannon & co’s “legal” plan to delay certification of the vote count was ‘stymied’ by the 1/6 insurrection– is faux– because they were running the 1/6 play simultaneously (& no doubt plan C & D as well)—I agree. As to MSM, we can be very grateful to today’s proliferation of cell-phone videos. As with many other crimes in progress [notably George Floyd’s murder]. This technology has armed the public with tough-to-deny evidence that curbs press’s proclivity for spinning speculation and both-siderism.
The Trumpers say the violence was instigated by Antifa and the FBI. But the most notorious rioters have been identified, found, arrested and are being held or convicted. They are all Trumpers. They were caught on video. Some posted their own videos to prove they were there.
“Navarro is a Harvard-educated economist ….” Another brilliant Ivy Leaguer, like Trump. Are their degrees really worth anything. Glad I chose Temple and had the Broad Street Subway to get me there.
Their degrees are worth a lot to them but not to anyone else.
Yeah, but we sure are worth a lot to them! Look at how much effort they make to gettin’ ours.
Harvard must have a great 400 level course on Machiavelli…
Probably have a course on the wonders that Milton Friedman and the other Chicago Boys did for Chile under Agusto Pinochet as well.
Augusto
I can’t even get their hero’s name right.
Dr. Ravitch is perhaps the best placed to talk about the value of doctorates from Ivy League universities, having been on the faculty at Columbia. I am curious to see if she thinks her doctoral students were not worth much.
I had some wonderful graduate students. Not a lot, as I was adjunct, part-time, never tenured. Some students asked to work with me.
If it’s any consolation, it’s mainly the economics degrees that are not worth much to anyone else other than the graduates. And Harvard is supposed to be among the best. Ha ha ha.
Harvard has lots of legitimate departments (biology, languages, physics, mathematics, history, geology) where degrees mean something.
But for some reason, they hire nitwits in the econ department. People who can’t do make simple spreadsheet errors and who don’t understand statistical significance (or lack thereof)
Then again, nitwits in econ departments seem to be the pretty common.
Oh, and I neglected to mention Harvard econitwits who thought (and probably still think) it was a good idea to invest billions of Harvard’s endowment in highly risky derivatives, which went the way of the Dodo when the derivative market crashed and burned in the financial meltdown of 07/08.
…and nitwits who believe that correlation = causation
Whatt is the significance of the Broad Street Subway?
How the Broad Street Bullies got around in the past!
Don’t forget John Eastman who received moolah from CU-Boulder, so CU-Boulder could break his contract.
https://coloradonewsline.com/2021/09/20/cu-insurrection-speaker-steve-bannon-apologist/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._Eastman
It’s disappointing that Eastman’s name isn’t as familiar to the public as Rudy Giuliani’s and Michael Flynn’s.
Linda– your last para in the 1/7 8:42am post nailed it. And the pandemic has ratcheted up the effect even further. They seem to have a tiger by the tail and so far the tail is winning.
In this post you appropriately focus on US contemporary culture, where politics are (and long have been) more closely tied to religious subculture than in 20th-21stC Europe. However, connection of fear to the hollowing out of the US middle class over the last 40+ yrs reflects a more universal [at least in the West] phenomenon. Societies with a pronounced rich-poor income gap have unstable govts both in the long run [feudal Europe] and short run [those with established bourgeoisie which then gets hollowed out].
Latin America is a case study in long-term instability caused by long-term gross rich-poor gap [the legacy of colonialism] periodically corrected by shorter periods allowing middle class to expand (until the next economic bouleversement). Those govts are mostly uneasy democracies, with a recent history of dictatorships devoted to rwconservative autocracy, or communism, or neoliberalism, always threatened (and occasionally overturned) by socialists or communists or their opposite number. Consequently, there, even economically ‘secure’ bourgeoisie is always looking over its shoulder to a mere 20 or 40 yrs past when their kind had the rug pulled out from under.
IMHO, polarized politics is the consequence of grossly unequal distribution of wealth. A large middle class means most of the population is able to live comfortably enough to take care of their families reasonably well. This pertains regardless of religion. Our economic policies pursued since ’79: we are flirting with becoming the uneasy LA democracy with disruptions of periods of dictatorship. Our peculiar religious history and its intertwining with politics simply means that is an angle that can be used by political power-mongers to divide us, just as they do black/ white issues or immigration at the SW border; just as LA societies exploit divisions over indigenous minorities, or Euro rw’ers exploit refugee issues.
p.s. Nevertheless I value that you regularly remind us that despite MSM oblivion, conservative Catholicism should be publicized as in cahoots with conservative Christians [Evangelists et al]—because they are– officially! Despite the fact that Catholics continue to vote reflecting the overall US vote [i.e., roughly 50-50 Dem/ Rep], the hierarchy [USCCB] is conservative [& supportive of school choice!], just as the white Catholics vote 60% Rep. The fact that congregants leave Catholicism faster than any other Christian denomination simply makes them increasingly conservative, reflected in the leadership. This makes them increasingly a rw-associated religious force to watch—as evidenced by their rapprochement/ alliance with Evangelists in recent years.
Thank you for your comment, bethree5.
Statistics about people leaving churches, instead of citation about absolute numbers in the various sects, is one way that the right wing can spin to convince the public of a lessened threat. I know I fell for it until I looked at the recent 20 year growth in absolute numbers in one of the two major American conservative religions.
A person’s race, black, brown, white, was highly significant in 2016 and 2020 voting but it may be less so for segments in the future. Unlike Trump, a GOP candidate may craft a message that doesn’t offend POC who came from conservative Christian countries.
A more inclusive right wing may attract traditionalists who oppose gay rights, women’s rights, liberal economics, etc. The right wing may attract people who want order and are uncomfortable with democracy which they perceive lacks order. People like Anna Navarro who emigrated from Venezuela are staunchly Republican and anti-Trump.
It’s significant that Putin, an orthodox Christian, is not fomenting division between American Christian sects.
Bethree5 –
My reply to you is in moderation.
The politicized Knights of Columbus provided an example of outreach this summer. Eighteen percent of native Americans are Catholic. The Knights of Columbus produced a documentary that was described as scheduled to air on ABC. Indian Country Times wrote an article about the documentary in which a University of New Mexico professor provided a quote saying that the documentary was a conscious effort at white washing events of the past.
Just recently, Diane posted about a Wisconsin Native American Tribe that was sponsoring a Hillsdale College conservative charter school.
Media informs us that Hillsdale is Christian. Hillsdale itself, convinces us that it is conservative. What is excluded is that Hillsdale has ties to prominent conservative Catholics.