Socialism in America

by

Gadfly

           President Trump has on numerous occasions asserted that America will never be a socialist nation.  Most visibly prompting these claims are the presence of self-proclaimed socialists in today’s politics:  Bernie Sanders, AOC, and so forth.


           Surveys reveal that the perceived idea of socialism is increasingly popular among Generation Z (age 5 to 25) and Millennials (or Generation Y; age 26 to 40).  Millennials and Generation Z will make up 37% of the electorate going into the 2020 election.  Generation Z prefers socialism to capitalism.


           According to Gallup, 4 out of 10 American voters support socialism in some form.  Yet, even though a slight majority of American voters do not support socialism, according to another recent survey, 77% of registered Democrats do.  Another survey by Pew Research captures the more complex nature of views related to capitalism and socialism.


           So, is America on the brink of becoming a socialist nation?  This is a binary question that implies a yes or no answer.
  

           A more precise question is to what extent is America already a socialist nation?  The answer is:  socialist elements already exist.  For an excellent bibliography of socialism, see Independent Institute’s article, “Best Books on the Folly of Socialism” (please spend some time reviewing the discussion that follows the article).
  

How do we know?  One of the central features of socialism is central planning.

What is central planning and what does it look like?

Central planning is a noble lie (see my article on Noble Lies) concept where elite in a collectivist system organize society for some social goal (with political and economic dimensions).  Here is a quote from the Chapter, “Planning and Democracy,” in F. A. Hayek’s book, The Road to Serfdom:

The common features of all collectivist systems may be described, in a phrase ever dear to socialists of all schools, as the deliberate organization of the labors of society for a definite social goal. That our present society lacks such “conscious” direction toward a single aim, that its activities are guided by the whims and fancies of irresponsible individuals, has always been one of the main complaints of its socialist critics.

In many ways, this puts the basic issue very clearly.  And it directs us at once to the point where the conflict arises between individual freedom and collectivism.  The various kinds of collectivism, communism, fascism, etc., differ among themselves in the nature of the goal toward which they want to direct the efforts of society.  But they all differ from liberalism and individualism in wanting to organize the whole of society and all its resources for this unitary end and in refusing to recognize autonomous spheres in which the ends of the individuals are supreme.  In short, they are totalitarian in the true sense of this new word which we have adopted to describe the unexpected but nevertheless inseparable manifestations of what in theory we call collectivism (p. 100; bold, italics are mine).

           Collectivism is fully manifested in America, where political elite are using the alleged COVID-19 crisis to advance the unitary end of safety.  Unfortunately, far too many Americans have lost their understanding and meaning of the concept of liberty; thus, they have been vulnerable to this very deliberate form of collectivism.  Therefore the socialist political elite assume they can exploit the “whims and fancies of irresponsible individuals."


           A proper understanding of the concept of liberty is the freedom to act as one chooses, provided it does no harm to others and is consistent with the rule of law.  American liberty that has been grounded in our Judeo-Christian tradition also involves a sense of personal responsibility for oneself and others, to be a good person, a good son and daughter, a good husband and wife, a good father and mother, a good neighbor, a good employee, a good citizen, and so forth.  This understanding has diminished over the years due mostly to secular humanism and an entitlement mentality.


           As I have previously cited in previous articles, Alexis de Tocqueville predicted these developments in his Democracy in America:

After having thus successfully taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp, and fashioned them at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community.  It covers the surface of society with a net-work of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd.  The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided:  men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting:  such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to be nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.  . . .  They devise a sole, tutelary, and all-powerful form of government, but elected by the people” (Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 1840, p. 398).

Tyranny in America
          

I have watched with great dismay, this form of tyranny descending upon our nation.  While President Trump has resisted imposing this kind of tyranny at the national level (issuing instead guidelines informed by “the experts”), many state governors have not.

  

Since I am a resident of Colorado, I will use Colorado as an example.  Governor Polis has issued orders to shut down restaurants, bars, gyms, theaters, schools, and essentially churches.  Certain facilities could remain open with restrictions, such as grocery stores, food takeout, and so forth.  This week, I learned the Governor will keep schools closed through December.  What is the overall unitary goal?  Public health safety.  With all the closures, hundreds of thousands of Coloradoans are filing for unemployment compensation.  Nationally, we’re now approaching $3 trillion in emergency economic recovering funding—all funded by debt.

What Is the Science?

As a former university professor (with a Ph.D.) and technical think tank analysist, I have been trying to understand the so called science justifying these actions.  It is dubious at best.  I do not trust what is being reported.

First, let’s start with a display that an ordinary person might see if they do a Bing.com search using the search term, “COVID-19 data.”  Here is one of the displays:

           The number of deaths reported:  50,177 for the United States and, in this image, 552 for Colorado.


           Consulting the CDC website, Table 1 below, as of April 23, 2020 reports a total of 23,358 COVID-19 deaths.  This number includes confirmed and presumed COVID-17 deaths (see footnotes below the Table).  The total number of pneumonia deaths is 53,768 (more than double COVID-17 deaths).  Influenza death totals (between the week ending 2/1/2020 to 4/18/2020) are 5,530.  Note the footnote suggests some influenza deaths may include presumed COVID-19.  Earlier in the year, CDC reported 24,000 influenza deaths (before COVID became a player).

           NOTE: Number of deaths reported in this table are the total number of deaths received and coded as of the date of analysis and do not represent all deaths that occurred in that period.

*Data during this period are incomplete because of the lag in time between when the death occurred and when the death certificate is completed, submitted to NCHS and processed for reporting purposes. This delay can range from 1 week to 8 weeks or more, depending on the jurisdiction, age, and cause of death.

¹Deaths with confirmed or presumed COVID-19, coded to ICD–10 code U07.1.

²Pneumonia death counts exclude pneumonia deaths involving influenza.

³Influenza death counts include deaths with pneumonia or COVID-19 also listed as a cause of death.

⁴Population is based on 2018 postcensal estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau (9)

           Here is another qualifier regarding COVID-19 cause of death.  CDC issued guidance on determining the underlying cause of death (UCOD) when it relates to COVID-19.  Here is the essence of the guidance:
  

In cases where a definite diagnosis of COVID–19 cannot be made, but it is suspected or likely (e.g., the circumstances are compelling within a reasonable degree of certainty), it is acceptable to report COVID–19 on a death certificate as “probable” or “presumed.” In these instances, certifiers should use their best clinical judgement in determining if a COVID–19 infection was likely. However, please note that testing for COVID–19 should be conducted whenever possible.

This is an example of “science” coming from the CDC.  I could find no other similar guidance for other infectious diseases.  So, a lot of the “data” being used for guiding policy decisions is based on guesses (“probable” or “presumed”.

  

Table 2 below shows the number of deaths by age group.  Note that for the groups 65 and older, 18,439 account for the 23,358 total or 79% under COVID-19.  The same group accounts for 43,664 of 53,768 pneumonia deaths, or 81%.  The same group accounts for 3,594 of 5,530 influenza deaths, or 65%.  In terms of the overall population, 23,358 COVID-19 total deaths out of 327,167,434 is .007%.

Table 5 below provides data for each state.  The graphic below is truncated to include Colorado, which shows 348 COVID-19 deaths, 809 pneumonia deaths, and 90 influenza deaths.  These data are different from that being reported on the Graphic above on the Bing.com website (552 COVID-19 deaths).

     

           So, what are we to conclude from the above data presentations?  First, it is far from certain, especially when any of it includes guessing.  Second, the guessing likely suffers from confirmation bias with the rampant fear generated in the public narrative.  Third, most of the “science” that seems to guide the current public policy paradigm comes from technocrats.
  

Technocrats

In his recent book, The Storm before the Calm:  America’s Discord, the Coming Crisis of the 2020s, and the Triumph Beyond, George Friedman describes the American technocrat:

The idea that emerged from both the New Deal and World War II was that a state managed by experts dedicated to solutions without an ideology would do for the country what it did for the war:  it would breed success.  But of course, this became a principle, the principle became a belief, and the belief became an ideology.  The ideology created a class who felt entitled to govern and who were believed to be suitable to govern.  . . .

The focus of the technocracy was social engineering, restructuring the way in which economic and social institutions worked in order to improve the lives of citizens. (p. 105).

CDC’s Dr. Fauci is a technocrat.  His credibility is beyond reproach by the left.  The left relishes the daily White House press briefing when Dr. Fauci appears to contradict something President Trump has said.  For example, President Trump seemed optimistic about hydroxychloroquine as a possible remedy.  Dr. Fauci argued that it had not been proven through clinical testing.  Thus, he debunked the study published by several French doctors (available here) because it was not set up using the clinical testing paradigm that the CDC considers the gold standard.

  

The French doctors that conducted the study concluded: “Despite its small sample size our survey shows that hydroxychloroquine treatment is significantly associated with viral load reduction/disappearance in COVID-19 patients and its effect is reinforced by azithromycin.”

  

Despite the actual evidence of successful use of hydroxychloroquine in combination with azithromycin in the French study, it was of no value to Dr. Fauci and fellow technocrats. In fact, Google, You Tube, Facebook, and Twitter have warned viewers that the study provides misinformation.

  

Most recently, when President Trump suggested we will get COVID-19 behind us moving into the summer, Dr. Fauci contradicted him by say COVID-19 will be with us going into the fall.  How does he know?  CDC can’t even collect accurate data and he is predicting with certainty that COVID-19 will be with us going into the fall?

  

Predicting or even forecasting is very difficult.  Scientists can’t even predict the weather.  Therefore we see weather forecasts.  Philip Tetlock and Dan Gardner wrote about this in their recent book, Super Forecasting.  “In this groundbreaking and accessible book, Tetlock and Gardner show . . . that good forecasting doesn’t require powerful computers or arcane methods. It involves gathering evidence from a variety of sources, thinking probabilistically, working in teams, keeping score, and being willing to admit error and change course.”

           For his part, President Trump appears to have surrounded himself with a variety of sources, has formed teams (task forces), and has adjusted along the way to keep America safe and also economically sound.
  

Unfortunately, President Trump is swimming against ideological currents.

Conditions Ripe for Socialism


           Even before the COVID-19 crisis, there were conditions lending themselves to fulfilling the Cloward-Piven Strategy published in the 1960s. The strategy called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".  Cloward and Piven, Columbia University Professors were self-proclaimed socialists.


           The following graphic from the Manhattan Institute shows the difference in the percentage of mandatory (welfare/entitlement) spending in 1965 (34%) and 2019 (70%):

           Despite the nearly doubling of mandatory spending of a constantly increasing federal budget, poverty levels have remained essentially the same percentage of the population.


           Yet, a more disturbing demographic is the gradual reduction of the labor participation rate.  In the last two decades (2000-2020), the passing of the Affordable Care Act of 2009 had a significant impact on the labor participation rate, when employees lost their jobs due to employer mandates.  The rate hovers at aroung 63%.  See the graphic below (retrieved from the Bureau of Labor Statistics):

           Since state Governors have essentially placed their states in lock down status, over 22 million have filed claims for unemployment compensation.  This number represents 13.5% of the labor force.  How many of these individuals will be able to return to their jobs when lock downs are reversed?  If many do not, the labor participation rate could approach 50%--half of our labor force actually working, the other half on welfare.


           Combine these changes with our medical infrastructure impact (many healthcare professionals not directly associated with COVID-19 have been furloughed), there will be additional ammunition for universal healthcare.  For compelling analysis along these lines (and the large number of deaths due to the ban on elective procedures) see articles by A.J. Kay here and here.


Conclusion


           America is on the verge of becoming a socialist nation.  The COVID-19 crisis is an instrument in the hands of the left to push America across the threshold.  The narrative on this crisis is shaped by technocrats and amplified by leftist politicians and the mainstream media.  Since many, if not most, Americans have lost their understanding of liberty (and the reason a Constitutional Republic was established to protect it), they are vulnerable to the tyrannical, collectivist actions in pursuit of a unitary goal:  safety.  Yet, even safety is a means for achieving the ultimate goal of a single party (collectivist) rule of American society.


           If Democrats keep the House and take the Senate and President Trump wins reelection, he’ll be a four-year lame duck President.  If President Trump loses.  America will cross the socialist threshold.  Many, many Americans will then lament, “We did not know” (a refrain so common among Germans after Hitler gained power and took Germany and the world on a horrific path—see this clip from Judgment at Nuremberg).

.

The Coming American

by

Gadfly

Americans are wondering what life is going to be like if and when we ever get beyond the fears of a viral pandemic.  This essay attempts to explain the current phenomenon by presenting theory about agents within a complex adaptive system (such as society and all its political, social, and economic institutions) and an analysis of known data on viral activity and the political economy, followed by how this will shape the coming American.

Theory

Black Swans are highly improbable events that can have existential effects.  In his book, The Black Swan:  The Impact of the Highly Improbable, Nassim Nicholas Taleb explains that "Such [Black Swan] events, considered extreme outliers, collectively play vastly larger roles than regular occurrences."  The COVID-19 virus pandemic is a Black Swan event.

America is under siege due to the treatment of a Black Swan event.  Ordinary Americans are being manipulated by external and internal political forces.  Specifically, the COVID-19 virus is being used as a “tagging” mechanism (i.e., amplified in the media) to significantly modify behavior in America (and possibly in other countries as well).  “Tags are ‘external’ characteristics of agents that can be recognized by other agents.  They facilitate selective interactions and the formation of aggregates and boundaries by allowing agents to identify and categorize each other” (from Smith and Bedau, (2000), “Is Echo a Complex Adaptive System,” Evolutionary Computation 8 (4), p. 420; available here).

In complex adaptive systems, the tagging mechanism influences flows of aggregations.  Aggregations represent agents (i.e., people).  The political manipulation currently at play involves shaping the flows of aggregations of agents (people:  the elderly, the vulnerable, business owners, etc.) well beyond public health; thus, affecting large numbers of aggregations of people trying to live a normal life in America.

    

In the public administration field what is happening with the political manipulation would be the “punctuation” function disrupting and then reshaping equilibrium (i.e., normal life) within a society--a social theory called punctuated equilibrium, borrowed from the field of evolutionary biology.  How many times have we heard, “a new normal”?

Analysis of Known Data


Science

According to NPR, the first documented case of COVID-19 (a corona virus) in America occurred on January 19, 2020.  The case was a man from the state of Washington, who returned to the United States from Wuhan, China, on January 15, 2020—two weeks after China officially declared the virus was an issue on December 31, 2019.  Today, as of 1:00 PM ET, March 24, 2020, there are 50,138 confirmed cases in the United States with a total number of 622 fatalities.

Let’s put this in context.  According to America’s Centers for Disease Control (CDC):  “CDC estimates that influenza has resulted in between 9 million – 45 million illnesses, between 140,000 – 810,000 hospitalizations and between 12,000 – 61,000 deaths annually since 2010.”  Estimates are not indisputable like the actual number of hospitalizations and deaths.  Estimates are based on modeling and assumptions that can be close to accurate or wildly incorrect.  This makes a difference because it is the reliability placed on “estimates” that determines the advertised death rate of .1%.

  

Using this number the public health community (an aggregation of agents) argues that COVID-19 is more deadly by orders of magnitude.  For example, as of 1:00 PM on March 24, 2020, the global COVID-19 confirmations versus deaths is at 4.45% (18,295 deaths divided by 411,242 confirmed cases).  This rate is 44.5 times the .1% rate.  The CODIV-19 rate for the United States is 1.24% (622 deaths divided by 50,138).  This is 12.4 times the .1% rate.

Unless I misinterpret CDC’s estimation rationale, it appears confirmed cases of influenza are hospitalizations.  For the 2018-2019 influenza season, the hospitalization estimate was 490,600 with 34,200 deaths.  The death rate, based on confirmed cases (hospitalizations) was 6.97% (34,200 divided by 490,600), NOT the .1% figure so widely circulated by the public health community (an aggregation of agents) and the corporate media (an aggregation of agents).  Consequently, the actual influenza rate is 5.62 times GREATER than the current death rate for COVID-19 in the United States.  This comparison should be an eye opener.  Combine this fact with the realization that we have been vaccinating people against the influenza virus for years.  Currently, there is no vaccination for COVID-19.

In 2009-2010, Americans experienced the A/H1N1 (influenza-like swine flu, beginning in California).  According to the CDC: “From April 12, 2009 to April 10, 2010, CDC estimated that there were 60.8 million cases (range: 43.3-89.3 million), 274,304 hospitalizations (195,086-402,719), and 12,469 deaths (8,868-18,306) in the United States . . ..”  Again, if we consider only the confirmed cases (hospitalizations) and deaths, the death rate was 4.55% (12,469 deaths divided by 274,304 hospitalizations), or 3.67 times greater than COVID-19.  Unlike, COVID-19, 87% of the A/H1N1 deaths occurred in people under the age of 65.

  

During the CDC documented timeline for the A/H1N1, swine flu pandemic, not once did the President of the United States intervene.  No social distancing, no businesses shut down, no government-control of businesses.

Based on the analysis above the table below summarizes data so far:

Virus	Cases/Hospitalizations	Deaths	Death Rate
Influenza, 2018-2019 season	490,600	34,200	6.97%
A/H1N1 (swine), 2009-2010	274,304	12,469	4.55%
COVID-19--US	50,138	622	1.24%
COVID-19--global	411,242	18,295	4.45%

Some will refute the above analysis.  They will argue that the capacity for hospitalization will influence the number of deaths.  The more that can be hospitalized then will reduce the number of deaths.  In simple math, that means the denominator increases.  So in our chart above, if the number of hospitalizations were 60,000 instead of the 50,138, then would it not be reasonable to conclude that the hospital intervention would have saved lives?  If this is true, then the number of deaths reports would be less than 622.  The death rate would then be less than the current 1.24% (622 divided by 60,000 = 1.04%).

Life is sacred (even for the unborn according to many Americans).  How much is a life worth?  Saving life is a moral obligation (except when it conflicts with a progressive’s “reproductive right”).  If saving one more life requires a total economic shutdown, is the tradeoff worth it?  Perhaps for the one life saved.  But how about for the millions who are adversely affected (to include death) by an economic meltdown?  The approach to a solution is not black and white.

Political Economy

Yesterday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average Index barely hovered above 18,000, down over 11,000 points within a couple week timeframe.  Today, it has rebounded to above 20,000.  Americans have lost nearly half of their retirement assets.  Some say—no worry, we will recover.  I say, I can support that if we resist a new, politically manufactured normal.

  

As I write this, the economic stimulus proposed by the President and Republicans in Congress to help common Americans (the little people) adversely affected by these circumstances is stalemated because it does not accommodate the left’s (political power grabbers) “vision” such as tax credits for solar panels, arguing with airlines over carbon footprints, and school loan debt forgiveness.

Some (like the New York Times David Leonhardt) believe it is not good enough to simply encourage private sector companies to ramp up production because this reflects an obsolete “small government ideology.”  After all, Hugo Chavez made the Venezuelan people believe that bigger government would solve their problems, especially by nationalizing (like all Communist countries do) businesses in the private sector.

  

These tactics are not unusual for the left, who believes in a win-lose, or lose-lose mentality:  they win, their political opponents lose; if winning is not possible, it is imperative that their opponents don’t win either.  They did this with government shut-down threats, always giving the impression that people would suffer.  In all the recent government shutdown incidents, government workers never lost pay or their jobs.  But one party won political capital by persuading public sentiment to see the other party as uncompromising.  Holding government workers hostage to a political agenda worked, and government workers got paid time off from work.

This is not so for the millions of people in the private sector who are losing income and their jobs.  There is no negative impact to government workers.  

The left believes the end justifies the means.  The end, in this case, is to deny President Donald Trump legitimacy.  They tried but failed during the Mueller investigation, and they failed to achieve a Senate conviction after a partisan impeachment in the House of Representatives.  Now the focus is to deny a path to reelection.  The left will do whatever it takes to make this happen, even if it brings pain to the little people trying to live a normal life.  

I must admit that I once took advantage of uncertainty to implement a major structural reorganization in a flying squadron consisting of a fleet of 36 aircraft and nearly 500 personnel.  Prior to the uncertainty, there had been a lot of opposition to change because it violated the “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” paradigm that had not changed since the Vietnam era.  I told my inner circle, “the best time to loot a store is during a riot.”  But, we all believed the change would improve our organizational effectiveness and be good for everyone involved.  And it was.

Well folks, we have the equivalent of looting during a riot by the political left, not for the common good but as a power grab.  Last week, the Senate passed a COVID-19-related House bill to respond to the urgency of the matter.  Yesterday, Senate Democrats blocked a $1.8 trillion Senate bill over ideological matters; and today, the House submitted a counterproposal worth $2.5 trillion, loaded with obligations completely unrelated to COVID-19.  In other words, Democrats are holding Americans (the little people) hostage to their progressive agenda.

Meanwhile, China may already be buying massive stock in companies seriously affected by the stock market losses.  We are now discovering that trade was a minor issue compared to the extent America and many other countires are so dependent upon China in a supply chain of critical products and services such as pharmaceuticals, precious metals, manufacturing capacity, and so forth.

  

China has been exploiting political and economic vulnerabilities for quite some time.  See for example, Helen Raleigh’s article, “Iran and Italy are Paying a Hefty Price for Close Ties with Communist China.”  And lest we forget the possibility of more sinister motivations, America’s exposure to the COVID-19 virus occurred just after President Trump negotiated a tough trade deal with China.

  

Sun Tzu was a Chinese general.  His book, The Art of War, devotes a chapter to defeating an enemy preferably without the use of force.  The chapter title varies based on translator preferences.  The different titles include, “The Sheathed Sword,” “Attack by Stratagem,” “The Plan of Attack,” and “Strategic Attack.”  According to this strategy, Tzu asserts, “supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting.”

Many Americans can appreciate that President Trump did not wait for a riot to implement needed change once inaugurated, even though he was fully aware of the rot that is the government swamp.  His changes are not welcome by the progressive left because it is content with the firmly established political, technocratic regime called the administrative state.  The progressive left believes in big government—the bigger the better.

Under constant assault by the left, even before he took office as President of the United States, President Trump is currently being pressured by the manipulation of public sentiment to do things that might not have been even thought of under a previous regime (recall the 12,469 deaths during the 2009-2010 Swine Flu episode).  Despite clear differences in public sentiment and rates and total numbers, we now have a national emergency.

  

Recognize:  Americans are having their First Amendment right to assemble curtailed. Social distancing has been imposed.  Businesses have been shut down by state governors.  Americans across the Nation have been placed in lock-down.  To my knowledge, none of these actions have taken place in America in my lifetime.

  

President Trump has formed a task force for a whole of government approach to dealing with the COVID-19 Black Swan event.  He and members of the task force update what they have learned, adjust from what they have learned, and provide guidance based on what they have learned to mitigate the effect of the virus.  President Trump personally spends each day along with members of the task force to update the public on progress. Yet, the left still criticizes the President for not doing enough, but, worse, claims he is an incompetent leader who divides our Nation.

How does America emerge from this Black Swan event?  What will Americans be like?

The Coming American         

At a Fourth of July celebration in 1894 in Woodstock, Connecticut, Sam Walter Foss recited his poem, “The Coming American.”  Here it is:

Bring me men to match my mountains;
Bring me men to match my plains, —
Men with empires in their purpose,
And new eras in their brains.

Bring me men to match my prairies,
Men to match my inland seas,
Men whose thought shall pave a highway
Up to ampler destinies;
Pioneers to clear Thought’s marshlands,
And to cleanse old Error’s fen;
Bring me men to match my mountains —
Bring me men!

Bring me men to match my forests,
Strong to fight the storm and blast,
Branching toward the skyey future,
Rooted in the fertile past.
Bring me men to match my valleys,
Tolerant of sun and snow,
Men within whose fruitful purpose
Time’s consummate blooms shall grow.
Men to tame the tigerish instincts
Of the lair and cave and den,
Cleanse the dragon slime of Nature —
Bring me men!

Bring me men to match my rivers,
Continent cleavers, flowing free,
Drawn by the eternal madness
To be mingled with the sea;
Men of oceanic impulse,
Men whose moral currents sweep
Toward the wide-infolding ocean
Of an undiscovered deep;
Men who feel the strong pulsation
Of the Central Sea, and then
Time their currents to its earth throb —
Bring me men!

The poem was from a larger collection in Foss’s book, Whiffs from Wild Meadows.  During the 1894 celebration, Foss read an excerpt from the book that introduced the poem:

But this is but prelude Fate’s orchestra plays,
To the strains that shall come in the fulness of days;
For the age-lengthened rhythm beat out by the Fates
In the building of cities, the founding of states,
In the earthquakes of war, in its thunder and groans,
In the battles of kings, and the crumbling of thrones,
Is but prelude that’s written by Destiny’s pen
To herald an epoch of masterful men.

In that day we shall worship, by wisdom made whole,
Not greatness of bulk, but perfection of soul;
And the thought-millionaires with our full acclaim then
Will be wreathed and anointed the leaders of men.
And methinks our Great Fate, from the hills to the sea,
Has sent forth this call to the years yet to be.

Foss was excited and hopeful that the “coming American,” with a perfected soul, would advance greatness for America.  He or she was not afraid, but bold, hardened by adversity, yet resolved to be a match for God’s mountains.  This was the coming American who rose to the occasion and defeated the brutal tyranny of 20^th Century communism, Nazism, and fascism.

Till now, President Trump symbolized the “coming American.”  He’s still standing, and his approval rating remains strong.

But what will his fellow Americans look like after the current CODIV-19 Black Swan competes its mission?

Will the progressive left be successful in achieving a punctuated equilibrium and fulfilling Alexis de Tocqueville’s prophecy?  Will America and the coming American look like Tocqueville’s “new normal” described in the following passage?

After having thus successfully taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp, and fashioned them at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community.  It covers the surface of society with a net-work of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd.  The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided:  men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting:  such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to be nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.  I have always thought that servitude of the regular, quiet, and gentle kind which I have just described, might be combined more easily than is commonly believed with some of the outward forms of freedom; and that it might even establish itself under the wing of the sovereignty of the people.  Our contemporaries are constantly excited by two conflicting passions; they want to be led, and they wish to remain free:  as they cannot destroy either one or the other of these contrary propensities, they strive to satisfy them both at once.  They devise a sole, tutelary, and all-powerful form of government, but elected by the people (Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 1840, p. 398).

If Tocqueville is correct, then Trump will lose the coming election; and America, as we’ve known, it will be forever lost.  History has recorded similar developments.  But, America is unique.  It remains the only country in the world that is a Constitutional Republic, based on the fundamental concept of liberty.

Fortunately, too many Americans still prefer liberty over security.  Like so many before us, we are prepared to fight for liberty, even if it involves death to preserve liberty for others.  This is the coming American I believe will reflect America after the COVID-19 Black Swan event.