Guernica Magazine and its Discontents

I first read about this imbroglio yesterday. I think Guernica magazine editors made a mistake in publishing this apologia, but compounded that error in removing the essay from the magazine's website. The fact is, the essay now exists, and Guernica published it. The record is the record. I get people at Guernica resigning if they wish, but their acts struck me as primarily performative. I am glad the LA Times provided the link to the essay (see here) from the Wayback Machine so I could judge for myself whether the author's essay was, in fact, an apologia.

I read the essay, and, as well written as it is, I have to admit it is an obvious apologia. The language is passive nearly each time it discusses Israeli conduct which leads or led to Palestinian suffering and death, while Hamas is presented as a larger-than-life monstrous organization whose violent acts are somehow functionally different from Israeli bombs and continued Israeli dehumanization. The essay writer wrote in a manner which made it sound as if all was essentially "normal" in Gaza and the West Bank before October 7, 2023, when 2023 had already been shaping up as the sixth or seventh most violent year since 2006 in terms of Israeli murders of Palestinians. See Wiki (Timeline of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict in 2023) for starters on this topic and see how much US media, whether legacy or alternative, did not really cover. It is ridiculous to state there was any functioning ceasefire as far as Israel was concerned during much of 2023. 

Yes, the essay writer does nice things for Palestinian people over the years. However, the way she described how she and a Palestinian family with an injured son were speaking with each other in broken English, Arabic, and Hebrew, reminded me of a southern white belle in Antebellum USA doing an act of kindness toward an injured enslaved person. The essay writer conveyed no sense she truly sees the fundamental problem with a system that creates the situation where she does her charity work, or how charity work can sometimes (maybe more often) morph into an acceptance of larger political and social injustices. Her own reaction to Hamas' atrocities on October 7 carry with that reaction a fundamentally naive view of what was happening before October 7. For someone so clearly learned and elegant in her writing and translation work, she showed no understanding of how British or US colonial structures operated with respect to indigenous peoples, or how one should never be surprised that colonized people will sometimes react with horrific violence against civilians in colonialist governments and systems. For we Americans, we should think back to mid 19th Century Comanche raids of white settlers, where Comanche warriors viciously killed men, women, and children--and raped women before killing them. And then we should remember how the US cavalry reacted--and remember, too, the outcome of our nation's genocide of Native Americans (just under four million indigenous people residing in 1776 in the land of the current continental US compared to merely 250,000 in the US census of 1900. See Wiki for the grim numbers).

For me, the imbroglio, as I am calling it, among this small literary left set is classic because, other than this, who besides people such as myself even knows Guernica magazine? We who inhabit marginalized left circles may fret and start to sound like Bill Maher over Guernica editors' censorship. But, let's consider a reverse scenario with a corporate media legacy publication. Imagine a corporate media legacy outlet published a Palestinian writer who wrote in the same passive voice about Hamas' atrocities on and before October 7th (yes, before October 7th, Hamas committed various acts of terrorism, remember, my fellow lefties? :)). And then the Palestinian writer wrote with a certain naive sensibility where she could do no more than send a reply text to a distraught Israeli Jewish friend, saying in effect, "oh too bad" about the latest Hamas atrocity. And then the writer, in the same essay, wrote in a manner revealing her not correcting a Palestinian friend who said there were "good rockets" being launched against Israeli civilians (the phrase in the essay writer's article was there were "good bombs" being dropped on Palestinians in Gaza). If such an article was published, the general public in the US would be outraged against that media outlet. "How DARE ____________ (media outlet) publish such hateful pro-terrorist propaganda!?!" And there would be so many mainstream voices demanding the article be retracted, just as Guernica editors did. And we lefties would be plaintively crying "Censorship!" Ah, the cynical ironies of politics. 

As it is, we already see how it is fine to hear and see those who yelled most loudly against "cancel culture" suddenly demand firing or canceling people who voice sympathy for Palestinians. I don't think I have to link to examples, do I? :)

I guess I've just lived too long, for I am cynically amused how Guernica's editors compounded their initial publishing error by removing the essay from the magazine's website. Thank goodness for the Wayback Machine. What is sad, however, is how these marginalized lefties have revealed how marginalized they are, and that the only publicity they receive is when they personally turn on each other. It's not as ridiculous as the wonderful scene in Life of Brian about the Judean People's Front leader saying how he hates the People's Front of Judea more than the Romans. But, I am thinking about that scene in a way I admit I don't like because I do think Guernica's editors should have seen what I saw as obviously wrong with the essay's tone and perspective. They could have had a kind and compassionate discussion with this intelligent and well meaning writer about her essay--and why she may wish to re-write the essay, and speak again with Palestinian acquaintances and friends, to create an essay with a more balanced and humane lens consistent with leftist antiwar and anti-occupation sensibilities. 

With regard to the essay writer's passive voice, I know I have been very conscious about that passive voice in media coverage when describing Israel's conduct. I continue to see it all over legacy media coverage, and even before October 7, 2023. I was, however, frankly surprised that someone so sympathetic to Palestinian suffering was unable to recognize the meaning of the structural issues of Israeli occupation, and then had the audacity to cut off Palestinian acquaintances and friends with whom she previously worked in her charitable efforts because of this modern version of a horrific Comanche raid. I expect people who identify with left politics to be able to hold two paradoxical thoughts in their heads if they keep in mind the need for human connection, love in a justice-sense, and recognition that unjust systems need to be changed. I guess I am still naive that way.

Oral arguments lead to Trump remaining on the ballot. In other words, Politics, not Law, wins.

Et tu, Ketanji? Et tu?

The otherwise awesome justice just failed my test for jurisprudence. She was literally telling the lawyer, Murray, that the 14th Amendment section 3, by saying only "officers" but not President or Vice President, when it included Representatives and Senators, means, back in 1868, Jefferson Davis and Alexander Stephens could not run for any office EXCEPT president and vice president. Huh? Even with a back and forth in the Congress that passed the 14th Amendment where one senator explained the office of president and vice president are included in the term "office"--and literally no other senator said it means it doesn't? Even when one reviews the US Constitution and sees that Representatives and Senators are called "members," not "officers," which is why those legislation positions were added? I had thought this was the weakest argument for Trump to make, even if the lawyers had a right to try it out at least. I also have consistently been saying none of the Colorado Supreme Court justices took that argument seriously, and the majority slammed it (The dissent did not state any disagreement with the majority on that ground).

Also, how stupid are these justices when Trump's lawyer said, "Well, Trump didn't actually take part in the attack on the Capitol..." and they accepted that with none pointing out how the felony-murder rule works, how conspiracy law works, and how the case law from the earliest days of the Republic held that any person even minutely connected before, during, or after acts of Treason are traitorous themselves. I guess all this only applies to leftist agitators, and people of darker skin colors.

Further, it is frustratingly ironic that Trump can literally say in his post-argument press conference that there was an "insurrection," but it was started by Nancy Pelosi. Yet, inside the Supreme Court's courtroom, the idea that this was merely a riot, which is essentially amorphous without leaders, was being taken seriously by some of the so-called justices. 

As I predicted in my post dated January 6, 2024, the US Supreme Court will likely keep Trump on the ballot despite the materially undisputed facts of Trump lying to the public about a fraudulent election in which he was deprived of re-election, his amassing people in DC to march on the Capitol building, and using language of war and violence (yeah, the one line about "peacefulness" doesn't cut it, as courts look at overall content and circumstances) to stop a presidential transition. That is not only the definition of "insurrection," which is a riot with intent from a leader seeking to control the government, or stop a government action. As I have said in my December 31, 2023 blog post, it is why Trump was indictable and would likely be convicted for Treason. There was, from the materially undisputed evidence, an intent to intimidate at the very least. January 6, 2021 was unlike yippies in 1968 seeking to "levitate" the Pentagon with flowers and meditation. It was also unlike the recent anti-Israeli war sit-in in the Capitol Rotunda. In neither event did Pentagon or Congressional people run for their very lives. We all saw this live. The idea that there is a reasonable doubt to this is itself ridiculous when the record before the US Supreme Court makes the statements I just articulated materially undisputed. But, we are at the late Weimar stage of our nation. And fecklessness rules the establishment, whether liberal or conservative/right wing.

In my January 6, 2024 post, I predicted the US Supreme Court would at least have six votes to keep Trump on the ballot. I guess the remaining three libs are going along, as I am sure there will be a hard push on Sotomayor. Feckless libs and corrupt reactionaries. That's our current Supreme Court. No belief in the law which they are supposed to uphold and enforce without fear or favor. SMH.

Will there be different candidates than Trump and Biden nominated this August? The chances are small, but growing.

I've said it before on Facebook/Meta. I'll say it again. There is a growing (though today still relatively small) chance Trump will be removed from the Republican ballot at the Republican Party convention this August. His cognitive abilities are clearly on the decline in ways that if this was Biden, legacy corporate media would be all over it. I also think he may be convicted in the DC criminal trial by then, which will be a cause of marked decline in swing voter support.  

It is my view Biden is even more likely than Trump to not be on the ballot at the Democratic Party convention this August--unless Biden's polling numbers dramatically improve and he avoids what I see as the inevitable physical fall that occurs with people who are 80 or older.  I can see Biden stepping aside for CA gov Gavin Newsom, who is now a leading active campaigner for Biden, or some surprise candidate. This will result in a 90 day sprint and the media will be relatively slow to catch up if the Dems use the advertising power that corporate Dems have--and bankers decide it is better to let the Dems win than the Republicans--as Republicans continue to show themselves incapable of governance in a way that threatens the function of American society. 

Biden's replacement will likely want to muddy the Israel-Palestine issue. Newsom or another replacement candidate will utter sufficient generalities towards Palestinian rights, and talk of two state solutions. This will ensure sufficient confusion among most who are not fully engaged with the history of the region and issue. The generalities will also come in a context where, by the summer, Israel's permanent displacement of Palestinians from Gaza will likely be essentially completed. Israel will, for its part, likely cool its repression for 90 days in the West Bank so that people are again fooled. Then, in 2025, Israel will start again its major settlement building and we will see even more displacement of Palestinians in the West Bank. This is the consistent Zionist project, regardless of the delusions of Americans who think of themselves as "liberal" Zionists. 

In any event, the 90 day sprint with a new Democratic candidate will also likely bring younger people back into the Dem fold, as there is no Republican replacement who will be both acceptable to the Republican base and to the general public. The Dems will advertise hard on the abortion issue and LGBTQ rights. This is not to imply those latter two issues are not important issues. They are important, especially when one issue affects tens of millions of LGBTQ Americans, and the abortion issue so, so many women. What remains frustrating, though, is regardless of the fact the vast majority of Americans are live-and-let-live on LGBTQ issues, and recognize now more than ever that abortion is about women's health and bodily autonomy, we have a political structure that gives more power to the minority of Americans who believe the flawed interpretation of their Christian religious philosophy (other religions don't have this level of being anti-abortion). It is therefore an issue, particularly with a revanchist, right wing Supreme Court majority. Thus, these are salient and important issues.

But what that also means is this: Palestinians are the leading sacrificial lambs in American politics. Other sacrificial lambs are those of us who recognize the need for fighting the effects of climate change and overcoming global corporate driven inequality. Again, this is why I support the growing and continuing agitation for Palestinian rights against genocidal enabling politicians, particularly in the Democratic Party. The Palestinian issue helps those agitating better connect the dots to the military-industrial-fossil fuel complex.  And It remains my hope young people continue to be more open to challenging capitalist ideological domination and see a social democratic future expressed in public policies.

US Supreme Court likely to overturn the Colorado Supreme Court re: Trump and ballot approval

The US Supreme Court has granted certiorari to hear Trump's appeal from the Colorado Supreme Court decision to bar Trump from being on Colorado's presidential ballot. 

The US Supreme Court is likely to overturn the Colorado Supreme Court, but such overturning will be for political reasons. This is the irony because the usual argument is that barring Trump from the ballot was political. Yet, as I made clear in my December 31, 2023 post, it will be hard for the US Supreme Court to deny Trump was a key person in the January 6, 2021 insurrection, and that it was an insurrection. They will also not be able to refute the fact that Trump spread the lie there was massive voter fraud in the election he lost and that he had somehow won--but in fact lost the election.

The US Supreme Court majority at least will likely hold the 14th Amendment section 3 is not self-executing so that it must be Congress which must act. However, this is ridiculous when there is no material dispute of fact of the Big Lie and Trump's role in the insurrection, making the situation not any different than a court or secretary of state finding the proposed candidate is not going to be age 35 by the time of a presidential inauguration or is otherwise not a natural born US citizen.  

Another basis to reverse the Colorado Supreme Court is to say it is a "political question" which means the Courts should simply not get involved in a dispute deemed political, not legal. Yet, that basis itself is political because the facts are materially undisputed and so there is no reason for the court to deny the reality of those facts. The "political question" doctrine is, in any event, to be sparingly used and is not a bedrock rule of law in practice. 

In addition, the politically minded six right wing justices could simply end the applicability of the 14th Amendment, section 3. They could hold the 1872 Congressional act that granted a blanket amnesty to all who supported the Confederacy means section 3 is a dead letter.  This was an interpretation initially believed by at least the court in the Majorie Taylor Greene lawsuit, but three law review articles, each doing a deep dive into the history of the amendment and that congressional act, have shown that position to be historically wrong.

I would only be surprised if the majority of Justices held Trump, as president, is not an "official of the United States." The Colorado Supreme Court's analysis of that argument should be conclusive in rejecting that argument. I note, too, none of the dissenters on the Colorado Supreme Court challenged that particular conclusion. As understood at the time, what use would the  amendment section be if say Jefferson Davis was barred from every federal office but could run for president or vice president?  Also, the amendment section does mention Senators and Representatives. But that is because, in the US Constitution, such are called "members," not "officials." 

If a majority of the Court had integrity and wanted to truly protect and maintain the US Constitution, it would hold that Trump (1) made an oath to protect and maintain the US Constitution, (2) never offered a meritorious defense for his statements and actions, and (3) spread lies about the election result and thereafter precipitated an insurrection to stop the constitutionally mandated presidential transition. Thus, a Court with integrity would hold Trump is correctly barred from regaining any federal office or being a member of the Congress unless 2/3rds of Congress votes to allow him to do so. 

Note that last part. Under the last sentence in the 14th Amendment, section 3, it is possible enough Dems could join all Republicans in the US House of Representatives and Senate to reach the 2/3rds. That would be the irony of ironies in the litigation now pending. I would hope enough Dems would see that as both morally wrong and worse, normalizing insurrectionist behavior on top of a Big Lie.

Progressive and other rock/fusion releases fifty years ago this year: 1974-2024

 It's that time again. We go through a bunch of albums turning 50 this year.  Albums I remember being released, many of which meant so much to me.  There is no particular order this year. Just me riffin'.  

Let's start with:

Kansas, "Kansas." This is the first album of what I consider to be the best American progressive rock band. The most amusing thing is Kansas actually garnered a Best New Group nomination from the odious Grammy Awards.  However, they lost to Starland Vocal Band, which had the big one hit, "Afternoon Delight." The first Kansas album stands the test of time and is well worth the full listen.  It is a remarkable work.  RIP to its violinist Robbie Steinhardt, who died some years ago. I see they are touring this year, but it is only the drummer and bassist, from what I recall. I don't like when the heart of bands are missing. I mean, Steve Howe should just say the Steve Howe band. There is nobody from the key or significant Yes lineup with him so that it just seems like false advertising.  Anyway, let's keep moving!

Renaissance, "Turn of the Cards." This is a wonderful album. So lush, so powerful, and the angelic voice of Annie Haslam. This is the album with "Running Hard," "Mother Russia," "Black Flame," and "Things I Don't Understand." It is a marvelous work that definitely sounds outstanding today. Why Renaissance never crossed into the big pop world remains perhaps the biggest mystery of the music scene of the 1970s.

Esperanto, "Danse Macabre." This multi-European band had three albums. The first was not memorable, and the third hit and miss (the hit is for the great version of "Eleanor Rigby"). But this album, the second album, is perfect.  And brilliant. It is a must-listen.

Argent, "Nexus." This was Rod Argent in full on prog mode. Love this album including today. I am so glad to have seen Rod Argent finally in 2023 when the Zombies came through NM specifically Santa Fe. He and lead singer Colin Blunstone were in great form and it was wonderful to see the heart of the Zombies who I had also never seen live.

King Crimson, "Starless and Bible Black" and "Red." Crimson released two records in one year as Fripp suddenly, and without notice to his bandmates, decided the world was too complicated, and King Crimson especially too complicated--and ended the band. It sure smelled like a nervous breakdown to us fans, and I know from reading Melody Maker that Bill Bruford was pissed and John Wetton frazzled by Fripp's decision. Crimson was on the verge of expanding its audience beyond prog fans to heavy metal fans, which could have put Crimson into stadiums for concerts in the US.  The record company, Atlantic Records, saw this, and in 1975, released a live album of Crimson simply called "USA" that captured the 1974 performances. I was lucky enough to see Crimson in May 1974 and they were so powerful and frankly sublime. God, I miss that lineup.  

Gentle Giant, "The Power and the Glory." GG released this album within a month or two of Nixon's August 8, 1974 resignation, and it was clear this album's lyrics and music were constructed in the context of Watergate, but with a more philosophical bent to show the rise and fall of leaders who manipulate public opinion with vague words and misleading/contradictory statements. It is extraordinary how this album holds up as an album, even as the songs individually don't have the legs to stand as strong in a consistent manner.  Listening to this album is like listening to a Broadway play's soundtrack to that extent. The album remains Derek Shulman's (lead vocalist and sometimes instrumentalist) favorite. I am more partial to a few other albums, but when I listen through the album, I am knocked over.  UPDATE 1/1/2024. I learned at the end of this day that Travis Scott, a rapper, samples the opening part of the first track, "Proclamation."  And it was a hit.  A big hit. I saw a live clip where Scott's entire audience is singing along with the GG song's opening right through "Hail! Hail!" It was surreal. :) FURTHER UPDATE: 1/2/2024. I forgot how the British label, WWA, required GG to write and record a "single" that would be good enough for mainstream radio. They came up with this, but British and American radio programmers were uninterested. And here is the live recording of "Hyena" from Travis Scott. 

Genesis, "Lamb Lies Down on Broadway." This may be, along with The Who's "Quadrophenia", the best double album in the annals of rock.  This album is so powerful to listen to even fifty years later (well, it was released in December 1974, so maybe 49 for most of the year!).  The prog elements are meshed into a pop sound, but with stronger musicianship than any pop band (including progressive pop band, Renaissance).  Just pick almost any track, except maybe one of the interludes, and be amazed. This is a powerful album and definitely one which highlights why prog fans talk of "Genesis with Gabriel", as in Peter Gabriel. This was Gabriel's tour de force lyrically and emotionally, but the Tony Banks keys, Steve Hackett guitar work, and Phil Collins drumming dominate so much of the album musically.

Yes, "Relayer." With new keyboardist, Patrick Moraz, who had just left Refugee, Yes had a great rebound from what most see as the excesses of "Tales of Topographic Oceans" in 1973 which drove Rick Wakeman out of the band. This is a near perfect album, with the one full side track "Gates of Delirium" and "Sound Chaser" opening the second side. The third and final song on the album is okay, but it never hit me all that much. But literally most of this album is amazing, and a must-listen. 

Refugee. Self-titled. Two members of the Nice with Moraz made this one and only album. It has some solid moments, but it never quite gets to the level that says, "Oh, I wish this band had stayed for a second album." The "Grand Canyon Suite" and "Someday" are the two best tracks I recall, and still like to hear from time to time. 

Camel, "Mirage." This was Camel's second album. It firmly established Camel as one of the great young prog bands. I have said, and actually saw someone else saying it later, that Camel was Pink Floyd with prog level top musicianship. Yes, indeed!  The album just flows right through, and reaches the crescendo of the amazing track, "Lady Fantasy." It is an album I found some heavy metal fans liked, even though I also find those who love prog-pop Renaissance love this album. American FM radio was already being commercialized into a new AM structure and so most people missed this band's incredible sophomore recording.

Daryl Way's Wolf. Self-titled (US release) and "Night Music" (UK release). The first self-titled album was a compilation of two 1973 British releases of this band led by violinist and former Caravan member, Darryl Way, with three other amazing musicians. John Etheridge may have been the fastest playing guitarist I ever heard (he ended up next in Soft Machine and became far more known in British circles as a jazz guitarist). This is hard prog rock and I know again metal heads who went nuts for this album. The second release is the same band line up with a separate lead vocalist.  It is not as hard a sound on "Night Music" but some great tracks nonetheless.

Jethro Tull, "War Child." Ian Anderson wrote most of this album in anger and frustration at the attacks in the British and US rock music press against "A Passion Play" and "Thick as a Brick," both of which remain perhaps in the top five albums of the entire 1970s and are as important as Gershwin's "Rhapsody in Blue." Just listen to those albums if you don't believe me, and then listen to "Rhapsody in Blue." In fact, I'd put those two albums above Gershwin's work. There. I said it. And I definitely believe it. But "War Child" is a great album on its own terms. It has "Skating Away on the Thin Ice of the New Day," "The Third Hoorah," "Two Fingers," "Back Door Angels," and the title track, among some other cool and creative tracks. It also contains the cynically created, but big FM and even AM cross over hit, "Bungle in the Jungle." Anderson would refer to the latter as "Grumble in the Restroom," and was clear he wrote it to satisfy the record company which wanted a hit single, not a one song album any longer. It has struck me as ridiculous for Anderson to put down TAAB and the Play albums as satires on progressive rock when the interviews Anderson gave to Melody Maker, NME, and other places at the time show his frustration for the rock critics ripping those two amazing albums, and how he had to rein in his creativity to create stand alone single songs.  But again "War Child" is an outstanding album with tracks that still get played on the classic rock stations and deservedly so.

Arthur Brown's Kingdom Come, "Journey." I remember telling people this album was so scary-weird in its electronics and musical structure that it would freak out our grandchildren. I am firmly convinced Gen Z would be amazed by this album if someone played it for them.  I won't say our daughter would like it, as she is more the Broadway tunes person, and likes her Mitski, Phoebe Bridgers, etc. But guys and gals who love the freakier music of today in video games would be knocked over by this very advanced in time album. It simply doesn't sound like something produced in the 20th Century. It was one of the earliest uses of a drum machine, and Arthur Brown made sure to put it to use for freaky purposes. Well worth the listen for at least "Time Captives" and "Superficial Roadblocks." 

Frank Zappa and the Mothers, "Live at the Roxy and Elsewhere." This is the greatest live album from Zappa, in my not-humble opinion, and has so many great tracks created for the 1973 tour that were simply so great live they were released live, not from studio. I mean, really. The whole double set is great and maybe I have to revisit my statement above about "Quadrophenia" and "Lamb" being the two greatest double albums to add this one.  This is vintage Zappa, where the patter is as great as Sinatra's patter for his great double live album at the Sands hotel in the early 1960s (Quincy Jones was Sinatra's arranger, and Sinatra was with the Count Basie Orchestra. Man, a great double album too!). Zappa is very proggy in multiple tracks, as he had some top level musicians, including Chet Thompson at drums and George Duke on the keys, among others. The Daughter loves "Cheepnis," Zappa's ode to 1950s monster/horror movies. If you want to get into Zappa, maybe start with this album. It may be overwhelming with the musicianship and prog aspects, but it will show why serious musicians and composers recognize Zappa as one of the greats.

Frank Zappa, "Apostrophe." This is the famous album with "Don't Eat that Yellow Snow." However, if one just thinks this is a poppy throw away album, one would be deeply wrong. This is the lineup with the Roxy concerts for the most part, and is as much a jazz-rock album as a prog rock album. This is Zappa roaring with amazing music and a sound that is deeply affecting.

Utopia. Self-titled. This is Todd Rundgren's band he foretold at the end of his "Wizard, a True Star" album in 1973. "Wait another year/Utopia is here/But there's more..."  This is a brilliant album with the greatest one side 30 minute song you'll ever hear.  Note those qualifiers, but "The Ikon" is a great concerto posing as a progressive rock song. Each movement contains elements of the next movement and then near the end takes the main themes and crunches them together. The first side is simply wild, with the track "Freak Parade" guaranteed to have your non-prog rock friends going "What the hell?" But it is so great.  It is Rundgren definitely channeling Zappa. 

Kayak, Self-titled. This is Kayak's first album, and contains the seeds of what would become its best album, released in 1975, "Royal Bed Bouncer." This Netherlands prog-pop band was not fully consistent, but I don't think one can find more bouncy, creative, fun, and yet complicated melodies than this band produced in the mid-1970s. There are a few gems on this album, making it a must-listen. 

Hatfield and the North, Self-titled. This is a great first album from the legendary Canterbury British band with a mischief making sense of humor and tremendous musicianship and composition abilities. This is not an album for the feint of heart or without some knowledge of music theory.  For those of us who do love creative musical styles, this is a wondrous album. There are separate track listings, but it just flows and flows and there are not really any breaks. Hatfield and the North would eventually morph into the last great 1970s progressive rock band, National Health, but here they were just starting to jell in this line up of superstars from other earlier Canterbury rock bands.

Strawbs, "Hero and Heroine." Group leader Dave Cousins called this his "nervous American music" album. I call it one of the master works of the era.  It is a great album from start to finish, where this progressive folk band accented the prog while maintaining the folk sound that served them so well. The title track is a wild and wonderful one, and there are other great tracks throughout. This is an album to just let it run and flow. A great work that almost feels like movements rather than separate songs, but the separate songs are outstanding. Lush melodies, great lyrics, and powerful musicianship from those who are not the greatest technical musicians.

Premiata Forneria Marconi, "L'isola di niente" or "World Became the World" (different title, not a translation). This was PFM at their height of prog and the album was wonderful. I saw them live in August 1974 at a free concert in NYC's Central Park and have to say it was one of the greatest concerts from any band of the decade that I attended. That performance became part of a live album, "Cook," I should add. I think the English release is better than the Italian release, which may put me in the minority.  But I loved Pete Sinfield's English lyrics for this album.  I should add I like the Italian version of the 1973 album, which in English was called "Photos of Ghosts."  There, the Italian version suits me better. But, anyway. Check out PFM if you haven't heard them, and "World Became the World" is a great introduction.

Le Orme, "Contrappunti." Another great Italian progressive rock band, with a powerful album released this same year.  If you like Rush, and I admit I have never been on that band's bandwagon, just listen to Le Orme. I consider them far more powerful.  But, let's admit Rush released its first album in 1974, and it was a major hit in Canada and made big inroads into the US without much airplay from the leading FM rock stations now called "classic rock." 

Return to Forever, "Where Have I Known You Before."  I never liked this album, and may have to give it another listen fifty years later. It is the first album with the still teenaged Al DiMeola at guitar, and which lineup would go on to write and record the classic jazz fusion/rock of the 1970s. This may be more interesting historically than an actual listen, but again I will revisit.

Stanley Clarke. Self-titled. This is Stanley Clarke's first solo album, also released in 1974. It contains "Lopsy Lu," with Tony Williams' amazing drum work, and remains one of the single greatest jazz rock tracks of the entire decade. This is a great jazz rock album hands down!

Eleventh House. "Introducing..." This is the first album of a jazz rock band that was a monster in the best sense of the term. It has guitar extraordinaire Larry Coryell and the outstanding drummer, Alphonse Muzon. I loved this album upon its release and remain a fan of that album through today. 

Maynard Ferguson, "Chameleon." What? An old 50s jazz great? What's he and his band doing here? Well, I'll tell you. It is a great jazz progressive rock fusion album, and one that is as good as any other jazz rock act released that year.  It has some of the greatest young jazz musicians who were steeped in prog and psychedelic rock, such as keyboardist Alan Zavod. I played a couple of tracks for The Son recently, and he was amazed. He loved it. Yeah, man. It is the greatest, man.  Definitely listen to this album, starting with Maynard's band's version of Chick Corea's "La Fiesta." It is better than Chick's original version. And the band does a raucous and powerful version of Stevie Wonder's "Living for the City," too. This is great jazz fusion but with the accent on jazz. 

Electric Light Orchestra,"Eldorado."  I did not want to believe it at the time, but I was starting to worry that ELO was leaving its more progressive rock roots for full-on pop. There were flashes of progressive elements, but this was definitely stuff my sister and her friends began to like. That meant definitely not progressive rock. LOL. I would not recommend the album to progressive rock fans other than to say, Give it a listen once and see if you like one or two tracks. For those who like later ELO, this may represent a good find that will bring some pleasure.

Emerson, Lake & Palmer. "Welcome Back My Friends...." This is a live double album which I admit to not placing all that high in the ELP album annals.  It is solid, no doubt. Just not compelling. Go for the studio works, including "Brain Salad Surgery" (1973) upon which this live album is built. 

Gryphon, "Midnight Mushrumps" and "Red Queen to Gryphon Three." This prog-folk band is a heavy version of the Strawbs, and is not for those who think they are going to get Fairport Convention or even Steeleye Span. This is progressive rock more than folk, but the basic elements of British folk are definitely present. This is a band which never got the FM airplay it should have had if FM had not been taken over by the full-on commercial interests. These are definitely worth hearing if you miss hearing prog rock you missed the first time around. I know I have loved hearing this band since The Son had me listen.

There are other prog albums released that year that I am not admittedly as major a fan or else never had a chance to listen to. Besides Rush, mentioned above in the context of Le Orme, there are the Rick Wakeman "Journey to the Center of the Earth" (which I have not liked then or now), Kraftwerk's "Autobahn" (which I was meh about then and now), Tangerine Dream's "Phaedra" (same), Focus' "Hamburger Concerto" (same), Caravan's "Caravan and the New Symphonia" (which merits a re-listen), Mike Oldfield's "Harvest Ridge" (another re-listen is necessary), Sui Generis' "Pequenas anecdotas sobre las instituciones" (a historical oddity from Argentina, which merits a listen for its appearance before the Argentine coup, as the album contains a warning in prog symphonic rock style), and others I missed the first time or forgot now. 

1974 was still a high water mark for progressive and jazz rock/fusion. In 1975, the cracks began to appear, as the combination of press rock critics, FM radio station program directors, and the falling away of audiences to disco, punk, and then new wave was beginning. The belief was progressive rock and jazz/rock fusion were excessive, in the similar way bee-bop or straight ahead jazz went past a larger audience in the 1950s. Remember what Chuck Berry was saying that he had "no kick against modern jazz/Unless they try to play it too darn fast/And lose the beauty of the melody/Until it sounds just like a symphony." That's why he liked his simple and straight forward "rock and roll music," ya know? The difference between that attack on bee-bop/straight ahead jazz in the 1950s and the attack on progressive rock in the 1970s was the latter was viewed with outright contempt by the anti-intellectual rock critics at Circus, Rolling Stone, Creem, Village Voice, and the NME in the UK, among others. It was only in the pages of Melody Maker in the UK, and then in more technical journals, "Guitar Player," "Modern Drummer," "Contemporary Keyboard" or "Stereo Review" one saw more respectful coverage of progressive rock musicians and bands. 

Oh well, that's enough for this holiday of New Year's Day 2024. We'll see what this year brings for all of us here in the USA and elsewhere.  

Why Trump committed and completed the act of Treason on January 6, 2021

Trump lied about the results of the 2020 presidential election. We know this from the evidence of an overwhelming number of REPUBLICAN witnesses to, and documentation produced in, the House Committee investigating the events from 2020 and early 2021. On top of that, Trump's public comments in the period from the 2020 election through and after January 6, 2021, including his speech that fateful day (under Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 US 444 (1969), one looks to the circumstances and overall tone of the language of a speech to see if its meaning is for "imminent illegal action," which negates First Amendment "free speech" rights), and the other speakers Trump designated to speak with him, showed an intent to at least physically intimidate congress-members from certifying the results of the 2020 US presidential election.

For those who claim fealty to the US Constitution, think themselves patriots, and claim our Republic is one of laws, not of powerful individual people, there are two cases from the very early Republic which explain the meaning of the Treason clause which should be considered. But, first, let's review the Treason clause of the US Constitution, particularly Article III, Section 3. That section states:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

Note first Treason does not mean one must consort with the enemies of the United States, which we know have to be declared "enemies" because there must be a state of war (or an act of rebellion for the president to act as commander in chief of the armed forces). The language of the Treason clause is adhering to enemies OR "levying war" against the United States.

But, what does "levying war" mean? The answer first came just six years after the start of our Republic. In US v. Mitchell, 2 U.S. 348 (1795), the Court interpreted the Treason clause in the context of the Whiskey Tax rebellion of 1793. Please read carefully the following italicized quote--and think about the evidence against Trump from his own circle around him, Trump's own public statements, and the fact that no lawyer for Trump has ever tried to adduce actual, factual evidence supporting the case that there was widespread voter fraud that resulted in a made up or fraudulent majority of votes for Biden over Trump:

By the English authorities, it is uniformly and clearly declared, that raising a body of men to obtain, by intimidation or violence, the repeal of a law, or to oppose and prevent by force and terror, the execution of a law, is an act of levying war. Doug. 570. Again; an insurrection with an avowed design to suppress public offices, is an act of levying war: And, although a bare conspiracy to levy war, may not amount to that species of treason; yet, if any of the conspirators actually levy war, it is treason in all the persons that conspired; and in Fost. 218, it is even laid down, that an assembly armed and arrayed in a warlike manner for a treasonable purpose is Bellum levatum, though not Bellum percussum. Those, likewise who join afterwards, though not concerned at first in the plot, are as guilty as the original conspirators; for in Treason all are principals; and whenever a lawless meeting is convened, whether it shall be treated as riot, or treason, will depend on the quo animo. 4 Bl. Com. 81. 1 H. H. P. C. 133. 4. Fost. 213. 210. 215. 218. 1 Hawk. P. C. 37. 4 Bl. Com. 35. 1 Hal. P. C. 440. 8 St. Tr. 247. 2 St. Tr. 586. 7. Keil. 19. 3 Inst. 9. The evidence, unfortunately, leaves no room for excuse, or extenuation, in the application of the law to the prisoner's case.

The one thing you can say for the Whiskey Tax rebels is the tax existed, and was not made up out of whole cloth. But, reading the above quote should make every person squirm who otherwise tries to claim what Trump did to be normal partisan politics. It should make every person who claims fealty to the US Constitution, the idea of true law and order, or claiming to support John Adams' dictum that we are a government of laws, not of men (persons) deeply offended by what Trump did. Again, Trump created a lie he saw had no factual basis, that of widespread election fraud, and then turned out people to intimidate or threaten or use violence to stop a presidential transition. Note, too, the language about anyone not concerned at first in the plot who joins in is as guilty as the original plotters. This is similar to the well-known criminal law known as the felony-murder rule, which our courts routinely follow up through the present century.

Then, in the first decade of the 19th Century, the US Supreme Court took the opportunity to further define the law of Treason under Article III, section 3. This time, the cases they were deciding were in the context of then-Vice President Aaron Burr's conspiracy and acts to take over parts of the Louisiana territory, which the US under President Jefferson had recently purchased in 1803. Burr's goal was to establish himself and a Colonel James Wilkinson as a nation-state empire with Burr acting similar to an emperor. He and Burr had people who conspired with him, and two of them, named Bollman and Swartwout, were arrested, tried, and convicted of Treason. Their cases went to the US Supreme Court. The US Supreme Court, in Ex Parte Bollman (1807) 8 US 75, held in part:

To constitute that specific crime for which the prisoners now before the court have been committed, war must be actually levied against the United States. However flagitious may be the crime of conspiring to subvert by force the government of our country, such conspiracy is not treason. To conspire to levy war, and actually to levy war, the distinct offenses. The first must be brought into operation by the assemblage of men for a purpose treasonable in itself or the fact of levying war cannot have been committed.

The Court then held:

To complete the crime of levying war against the United States, there must be an actual assemblage of men for the purpose of executing a treasonable design. In the case now before the Court, a design to overturn the government of the United States in New Orleans by force would have been unquestionably a design which, if carried into execution, would have been treason, and the assemblage of a body of men for the purpose of carrying it into execution would amount to levying of war against the United States; but no conspiracy for this object, no enlisting of men to effect it, would be an actual levying of war.

The Supreme Court then stated:

...(I)f war be actually levied, that is, if a body of men be actually assembled for the purpose of effecting by force a treasonable purpose, all those who perform any part, however minute, or however remote from the scene of action, and who are actually leagued in the general conspiracy, are to be considered as traitors. But there must be an actual assembling of men, for the treasonable purpose, to constitute a levying of war.

The Supreme Court also held the following, which should be really eerie to read for those who think Trump did not commit constitutionally defined Treason:

This position is correct, with some qualification. It cannot be necessary that the whole army should assemble and that the various parts which are to compose it should have combined. But it is necessary that there should be an actual assemblage, and therefore the evidence should make the fact unequivocal.

The traveling of individuals to the place of rendezvous would perhaps not be sufficient. This would be an equivocal act, and has no warlike appearance. The meeting of particular bodies of men and their marching from places of partial to a place of general rendezvous would be such an assemblage.(Underline added)*

Every American who truly cares for law and order, and for protecting and maintaining the US Constitution, should have shuddered when reading the above--especially considering the ample, and frankly materially undisputed, evidence from Republicans around Trump in their testimonies. And people of good will should wonder no more as to why there has been no direct refuting evidence adduced in the State Bar proceedings against Trump's lawyers about the supposed widespread fraud in the 2020 election. There should be no more wondering why Trump keeps using technical defenses of claimed executive immunity and never produces evidence that would prove his case of widespread fraud that deprived him of the presidency. One should also note the Colorado State Republican Party's appeal from the Colorado Supreme Court opinion depriving Trump of ballot access does NOT challenge the Colorado Supreme Court's finding that Trump engaged in an insurrection under the 14th Amendment, section 3. See Petition from the Colorado State Republican Party.

My points here are simply these: 

First, US Attorney General Merrick Garland and his special counsel, Jack Smith, should have charged Trump with Treason. Doing so would have allowed people to understand what I am saying about the law of Treason. It would have focused even quite a few Trump fans to realize the gravity of Trump's statements and actions. It would force people to grapple with the evidence adduced, and why and how Trump and those around him are unable to produce refuting evidence that any reasonable court would even consider.

Second, as someone who mostly votes for persons with the Democratic Party, I believe it is, from a politically partisan stance, better for the Democrats for Trump to remain on the ballot. But I support law over politics, no matter how quaint that sounds. I think Trump is vulnerable no matter what current polling data says, as we are a long way off to November 2024. I think the economy may be getting better for people with tamed inflation, and people will see how the generally positive economic indicators are now better for them. It remains depressingly unfortunate that Palestinians being killed in Gaza and the West Bank will be ignored, no matter what those of us who oppose Israel's actions believe. But, as with most foreign policy matters over the two plus centuries of American politics have shown, foreign policy matters are most often sadly subordinated to domestic politics even when the US is either enabling or instigating the foreign policy crises. 

I believe the Colorado Supreme Court and Maine's Secretary of State were each legally, and as a matter of constitutional history, correct regarding the 14th Amendment, section 3 to the extent a state does not need to wait for a formal criminal finding against Trump, or wait for Congress to act, when the evidence for engagement in an insurrection is not materially challenged. That italicized part is key! For then, the point becomes as clear as the case of someone running for president who would not reach the age of 35 before the inauguration date. 

The people who are being politically partisan are those who want Trump to be on the ballot and potentially serve again as president of the United States. Democrats who want Trump to remain on the ballots of the various states know what I know about Trump's electoral vulnerability, and are thus good with dispensing with legal arguments for short term politically partisan motives. Either that, or they are  scardey-cat libs who don't want to defend their own arguments. Republicans who want Trump to remain on the ballot are either (a) Trumpers, (b) anti-Trumpers who somehow believe Trump will more naturally implode, or (c) Republicans afraid of death threats or worse from Trump fans for saying what I am saying. 

I think it is past time for people of good will and good faith across the political spectrum to acknowledge the law of Treason reasonably, and frankly, conclusively, applies to Trump's statements and actions. What happened from Election Day 2020 through January 6, 2021 was not Yippies gathering people at the Pentagon to levitate the Pentagon to protest an undeclared and unjust war. Those Yippies and their supporters were not engaging with violent intent or even the type of intimidation the term "intimidation" was meant to convey in US v. Mitchell, supra.  It was not a sit-in in the lobby of one of the Congressional buildings protesting a foreign crisis in which the US is directly enabling and actively involved in. What occurred on January 6, 2021, even when one accepts how some Capitol Police let in those entering the Capitol, was about actions that were essentially about true physical intimidation, and a threat of or acts of violence, through an assembly of truly angry people. In 1968, Pentagon officials didn't run for their lives from yippies and hippies who had flowers in their hair and hands. Senators or Congresspeople did not run for cover during the recent sit-in which concerned a protest against the US complicity with Israel in bombing Gaza. And even the riots that broke out after the George Floyd murder in several cities in 2020 were not organized as riots by the amorphous Black Lives Matter movement leaders.

What is really ridiculous about what Trump did, on top of its illegality, was to push the delusional belief that massive numbers of votes were stolen from Trump and that Trump actually somehow won the popular vote and Electoral College vote. That belief is a lie when it is not a delusion, and a delusion that became for too many a lie. At least with the Whiskey Tax rebels, those peasant farmers were dealing with an actual tax they reasonably believed was unfair to a point where it threatened their livelihoods and small plot ownership. They were not engaged in delusional thinking based upon lies. And even President George Washington recognized this as he pardoned various leaders of the Whiskey Tax rebels toward the end of his second presidential term.

Again, once one focuses on the facts of Trump's statements and conduct, it becomes far easier to understand Trump violated his promise to protect and defend the Constitution. It becomes far easier to see why the Maine Secretary of State and Colorado Supreme Court decided what they did. The procedural and related non-substantive arguments begin to fade away, and make those decisions from the Colorado Supreme Court and Maine's Secretary of State denying Trump the ballot designation as not fundamentally different than denying ballot certification for someone not meeting age or residence requirements. 

I would also like to send this personal message when dealing with Republicans and Trump fans of all stripes: I am of the personal opinion there is a Venn Diagram overlap between those who want to protect Trump and those who were fine with blacklisting Colin Kaepernick from the NFL for taking a knee during the national anthem during football games. Those folks who now want us to believe it is anti-democratic to deprive Trump from being on the ballot or serving again as president with the evidence adduced against him--and Trump's refusal to attempt to actually refute the evidence against him--were and are perfectly fine with a group of billionaires running the NFL to deprive Kaepernick of his entire livelihood to play in the NFL with no due process. Yeah, yeah, the NFL is a privately run organization. However, it is so often tied up with public funds and is an important element for our society's view of itself as a meritocracy of talent, not one's political opinions. With Trump and his words and actions, we are talking about allowing a guy to potentially become president of our nation again when faced with what is materially undisputed evidence supporting a finding of Treason. This is surely not normal, but it is one that people who believe in John Adams' dictum should be outraged about that Trump is this far along the path to the Republican nomination and remaining on various state certified presidential ballots. 

*It should be noted the US Supreme Court ordered the two fellows released for a lack of material evidence against them beyond talk, and that they were not involved in any sufficient action.

Celebrity politics, movements, and the presidential election of 2024

My Congresswoman, Melanie Stansbury, has said, when running for office, the key to success is telling one's personal story. I was appalled at this because it was admission that our politics is built on celebrity culture and the money-power that enables that celebrity culture.

This morning, my feed contained an FB ad for a Latina woman running for US Senate against right wing grifting Republican Rick Scott in the State of Florida. This is what the ad said:

Will you let me introduce myself?

Hello, (emoji) it's Debbie, and I'm the Democrat running to defeat Rick Scott. I immigrated to America when I was only 14. My family lived in a one-room apartment, and I picked up shifts at the local doughnut shop to help make ends meet.

Florida has given my family so many opportunities. I refuse to let right-wing radicals push my beloved home state backwards. And there's no question my opponent will write million-dollar checks to fund his campaign. I need your help to defeat him. Please, will you chip in before midnight tonight to flip Florida blue?

Thank you. Debbie (heart emoji)

In this ad, we learn NOTHING about this woman's policies and whether she would actually stand up against the establishment forces that made her mom's life so hard. Too often, these sorts of people get to DC and are dazzled by the wealth and power. See: AOC. They don't have a Kshama Sawant approach to politics because the politics which got them elected is about self-actualization, not community justice. 

My take about the presidential election in 2024 is none of the duopoly's candidates are going to stop Israel's genocidal attacks on Palestinians in Gaza and increasingly the West Bank. None are going to stand up to the military-industrial complex. None. But, Trump has truly become the fascist personified in American politics, and is the likely primary winner. And the court system, other than Colorado's Supreme Court, is too timid to stop an insurrectionist who broke his previously made promise to protect the Constitution--and where the plain language of the 14th Amendment, Section 3 says such a person should be barred from re-standing for or regaining office.

The answer is in movement politics, whether in labor, civil rights, or environmentally based. The thing about Biden is he is more moveable on these issues than anyone else in the current duopoly in ways that may improve the situation domestically or in foreign policy. To ignore his court appointments, NLRB appointments, and FTC appointments is to miss a lot. They are better than the last six presidents.

Yes, I know Biden has completely enabled the Israeli genocidal policies, and is a devotee of the military-industrial complex. However, even there, we may find a positive effect in a different direction when I see so many White House staffers willing to stick out their necks against the continuation of pro-Israeli policies.

I don't expect to vote for Biden necessarily in a state where Biden will win by 10-12 points, and, if you are in a state that expects to vote for Trump by 20 points or more, a third party vote makes a lot of sense (I have different numbers so that it is clearer that Trump's victory will be based not on the national popular vote, but on the outdated and harmful Electoral College).  However, as of December 28, 2023, I may, in my State of New Mexico, vote for Biden's reelection next November. Again, it is about not making things worse as there are signs of hope in labor, environment, and civil rights movements. I also believe the economy may well improve with good wages in 2024 if the Fed allows for lower interest rates and doesn't try to sabotage the economy, as I had thought the Fed Chair would do. The irony there is it will increase the opportunity for Biden or another Democrat (in case Biden has the inevitable physical fall) to prevail without the votes of people such as me. That is why I used the term "irony" because I may be more comfortable withholding my vote for the duopoly in that circumstance. If it is not Biden, but another Democrat, we will also see if Biden's replacement, too, is one who is malleable. In that scenario, I am less certain a Biden replacement, even a Newsom, is worth voting for to the same extent as Biden as they are far less likely to be pushed in the way Biden has been pushed on labor, civil rights, and anti-trust actions.

I should say I don't think this is about weakness with Biden. I think Biden sees himself as old and recognizes this is his moment. He is still a believer in the New Deal and the fundamental mythology surrounding our World War II behaviors. It is what drove his desire for bipartisanship, I should also add. But he has been largely disabused of that latter notion, which has made Bernie Sanders more influential in labor, anti-trust, and judicial appointments. He is, though, hit and miss on environmental issues. Hence, again the primary importance of movements.