Heading into the Storm

Implicit association tests (IATs) suggest a bias in America favoring Whites over people of color

With the Election next Tuesday, America is about to see how well the “glue” holds. Can our courts and police forces provide a sense of justice being impartially served? Or will we descend into bleak partisan chaos if the voting is close?

My concerns focus on the political divide between Democrats and Republicans with regard to the Supreme Court. A majority of the current Supreme Court Justices were appointed by presidents George W. Bush, Jr. and Donald Trump, who both lost the popular vote. Chief Justice John Roberts, Brett Kavanagh and Amy Coney Barrett were all part of the legal team that aided Bush in the fight to count or not count votes in Florida. The Supreme Court eventually ruled in Bush’s favor and the Florida recount ceased, giving the Presidential victory to Bush.

Recently the Washington Post reported that white nationalists were attempting to infiltrate law enforcement . Since wide-spread racial bias seems to exist across our society, aided by stereotypes, what are the odds these extremists could find fertile soil, at times, in trying to recruit allies that give them elbowroom? 

Let’s hope for the best. But if legal maneuvering delivers an Electoral College victory to Trump, despite Joe Biden winning the popular vote, protests could erupt that will make the Black Lives Matter marches seem tame by comparison. Then how will the police respond?  Will fears of racial strife, lost lives and looting make the perversion of democracy seem like the lesser “evil”? Over the next days and weeks leading up to Inauguration Day in January, we’re about to find out.

How to Promote Peace in the Streets

Released today: episode #26 of “Dan Hill’s EQ Spotlight,” featuring Thomas Abt, the author of Bleeding Out: The Devastating Consequences of Urban Violence – and a Bold New Plan for Peace in the StreetsListen to the clip below and click on the image to get to the new episode.

Abt is widely considered to be America’s foremost expert on the use of evidence-informed approaches to reduce urban violence. He is a Senior Fellow with the Council on Criminal Justice in Washington, DC. Prior to the Council, he held posts at Harvard University and in the U.S. Department of Justice.  Other media outlets that have covered Abt’s work include the Atlantic, the Economist, Foreign Affairs, the New Yorker, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, CNN, MSNBC, PBS, and National Public Radio.

In this episode, the topics range from the human and economic costs of violence, to how a focus on a limited number of bad people, bad places and bad behaviors can improve situations that may otherwise look hopeless. The interview’s final question raises the specter of whether police bias in favor of gun-toting white vigilantes could ever become a serious issue or not.

Dan Hill, PhD, is the president of Sensory Logic, Inc.

2020 State of Disunion Address (in Decoded Photos)

Well, from the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, dispensing with the usual introduction of calling it a “high privilege and distinct honor” to present the president of the United States; to Donald Trump not shaking Pelosi’s hand; to Pelosi ultimately ripping up her copy of Trump’s campaign rally / reality show version of a State of the Union address, what a mess. Hard feelings were everywhere on display:

020620-01 State of Union

Not once did Trump mention his impeachment or Senate trial during his speech. But what are the odds that ahead of the speech a sad and angry Chief Justice John Roberts wasn’t focused on a trial where U.S. Senators (Republicans especially) ignored his instruction to remain attentively in their seats? Note Roberts’ pinched, raised inner eyebrows (sadness and fear), his firmly pressed lips (anger), and his raised chin (sadness, anger and disgust).

020620-02 State of Union

Not on the same page, by a long shot – Pelosi with eyebrows arched in surprise and eyes wide open, along with feigned smile, after being snubbed by Trump after offering a handshake; Vice President Mike Pence and Trump with eyes closed or downcast (sadness), and Trump with a mouth pressed together in anger and hinting at a smirk.

020620-03 State of Union (Eric)

Eric Trump with eyes narrowed in anger, the slightest of (bitter) smiles, an upper lip raised unilaterally in contempt and a mouth pressed tight in anger as he looks over at his brother, Donald Trump, Jr.

020620-04 State of Union (Schiff)

Lead U.S. House of Representatives prosecutor, Adam Schiff, with a slightly jutting lower lip (disgust and sadness), eyebrows lowered, eyelids tight and mouth taut – all signs of anger, as he sits besides his fellow prosecutor, Jerrold Nadler.

020620-05 State of Union (Rush & Melania)(2)

An ecstatic Rush Limbaugh after being awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in an impromptu “ceremony” featuring First Lady Melania Trump looking uncharacteristically happy while still not being able to evade her usual look of scowling (raised upper lip, narrowed eyes). To Limbaugh’s left, a more mildly happy Second Lady Karen Pence with a worried, vertical crease between her eyebrows.

020620-06 State of Union (Pelosi Rip)

The coup de grâce of a wretched, divisive spectacle: Pelosi with a grimly set, angry mouth as she rips Trump’s speech apart quite literally, piece by piece. This moment comes after Pelosi has exhibited a long series of distorted mouth grimaces while listening to Trump’s speech. Down and out (disgust and sadness) went her lower lip, when she wasn’t smirking or pressing her lips together, ever more tightly, in a range from annoyance to outrage.

All in Favor of a “Public Hanging,” Vote Cindy Hyde-Smith

Remember the U.S. Supreme Court five years ago rolling back the Voting Rights Act of 1965? Back then, Chief Justice John Roberts was claiming “things have changed dramatically” in favor of no longer needing electoral safeguards in states with a history of racial bias. Well, Roberts’ rationale is looking more ludicrous by the day. For one thing, isn’t it odd how most conservatives didn’t object to that ruling as another case of “activist judges” mandating from the bench? I guess re-activist, reactionary judges are okay.

For another, consider the U.S. Senate race just concluded in Mississippi. First, the Republican candidate, Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith, espoused the view that it’s a “great idea” to make it harder for “liberal folks” to vote. Then she was photographed wearing a Confederate hat and brandishing a rifle before being filmed at a campaign event lauding a campaign supporter with the words, “If he invited me to a public hanging, I’d be in the front row.” Who might be victimized? (Hyde-Smith’s opponent is, by the way, Mike Espy: the first African-American elected to Congress from the state since the Reconstruction era.)

Welcome to Mississippi, a place where over 600 lynchings of black people took place between 1877 and 1950 (more than any other state). With the election next Tuesday, the one and only debate was held earlier this week at an event where an always-nervous looking Hyde-Smith came to the lectern with a massive pile of notes to guide her through the evening. Now at last the Senator was ready to make an apology for her “public hanging” remarks by seeming to read her apology verbatim from her pre-assembled notes.

112818-02 Cindy Hyde-Smith Notes

“For anybody that was offended by my comments” (in other words, anybody not part of my base), “I certainly apologize,” Hyde-Smith began. “There was no ill-will, no intent whatsoever in my statements.” How fortunate it is that the Senator didn’t, at least, say she was sincerely apologizing. Nothing would have been farther from the truth. From her apology, note the flared upper lip (indicative of contempt for feeling forced to issue an apology); followed by closed-eyes (I can’t believe I’m saying this) and a lip pushed downward in disgust while affirming there “was no ill-will.”

Let nobody be fooled—not even you, Judge Roberts. Notice a pattern? Disenfranchised voters may have made the difference in Georgia’s governor’s race, and in Florida the Republican gubernatorial candidate Rob DeSantis issued a warning during the campaign for voters not to “monkey it up” by supporting his African-American opponent Andrew Gillum.

In her excellent, penetrating book, Democracy in Chains, Duke University professor Nancy MacLean unearths how the billionaire Koch brothers game plan for re-imposing robber baron capitalism in America took its legal impetus from the writings of an obscure economist, James McGill Buchanan. What got Buchanan’s goat? Why, it was the Brown v. Board of Education ruling in 1954 that called for the dismantling of segregation in public schools. A way of life was threatened. For the rest of his career, Buchanan looked for ways to neuter the federal government’s power and thereby limit equality and fairness. Long live Dixie? I certainly hope otherwise.