Violence in the U.S., Violence in Spain

This morning I read an article in our local newspaper about a moderate increase in crime in the province of Malaga in 2016. This got me thinking about violence and how it compares between the US and Spain overall. It occurred to me that the simplest, and perhaps most indicative, comparison would be the homicide per 100,000 rate. So that's what I looked up. Well, as it turns out, I couldn't find definitive statistics for 2016, so I went back to 2014. In the US, the rate was 4.5/100,00, the lowest rate since 1963. (That's according to the FBI.) For Spain, the rate for 2014 was 0.7/100,000. That's a very big difference. And for some historical perspective, note that for the U.S., the 4.5 rate marks a historic low, while a comparable rate in Spain would be considered scandalously high! Spain is, indeed, a generally peaceful place. The Institute for Economics and Peace ranks Spain as the 25th most peaceful country in the world on its Global Peace Index for 2016, well ahead of the U.S., which ranks 103rd (out of 163 countries studied). It's strange, isn't it?, how so many American politicians love to refer to the U.S. as the "greatest country in the world!" It baffles the mind how a reasonable person could reconcile such a low standing with regards to violence with status as the world's "greatest country".

I do not believe Americans and Spaniards are particularly different with regards to violence generally. Our educational outcomes are similar, as are many other social, economic, and cultural dynamics. The obvious difference is that the U.S. is drowning in firearms. In terms of gun ownership, the U.S. is, yes, without a doubt, the greatest country in the world. No other country can remotely compete when it comes to our insaciable obsession with possessing instruments of death. The rate in the U.S. is estimated at 112 firearms per 100 inhabitants. Over one gun per person!  (And most of the people I know don't own any guns, so just imagine...) Spain ranks 59th in the world, with an estimated rate of 10.4 firearms per 100 inhabitants. In sum, gun ownership in the U.S. is approximately ten times what it is in Spain. No need to think this one too hard: the homicide rate in the U.S. is much higher than it is in Spain because in moments of rage it is so much more likely that an American can simply grab a gun and fire away. That is far less likely to happen here.
The relative rarity of gun violence in Spain has obvious benefits in terms of general well being. People have many worries, many troubles, but being randomly shot at is certainly not one of them. And imagine how this impacts policing! Spaniards do not fear the police, in large part because Spanish police are not trained to fear being shot at, and as a result their general demeanor is tremendously more relaxed than that of the typical American cop. And of course, there is the whole issue of the militarization of American policing, with the military style gear that results in great intimidation of the citizenry and constant aggressive posturing. The image above is simply not part of the Spanish landscape. It's a true shame Americans have accepted this. 

American Carnage

Carnage is an impactful word. Generally speaking it's a word we like to avoid because what it evokes is violent and ugly. And it's about us, our dead, mutilated bodies. Our very flesh. And thus it was so striking that Trump infamously used the word in his inauguration speech. During the campaign, it was evident that Trump was a fear monger. Who would have guessed that such embarrassing behavior would continue unabated after the election? Well, since Trump's personality is so painfully and transparently on display on a daily basis, it probably should have surprised us very little. Or not at all. Three days ago a "radical Christian terrorist" massacred six people in a mosque in Quebec. No tweets from Trump. Not one. No condolences. Yesterday a machete-wielding tourist was killed at the Louvre in Paris when he tried to attack a police officer. No others were seriously hurt. And yet, Trump tweeted this:

 President Trump Retweeted

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump  17h17 hours ago

A new radical Islamic terrorist has just attacked in Louvre Museum in Paris. Tourists were locked down. France on edge again. GET SMART U.S.

37,939 replies36,516 retweets133,007 likes

First of all, it's a lie: the Louvre was not attacked; rather there was merely an attempted assault on a police officer, who was unharmed. Much more importantly, note the alarm, the totally irrational reaction. A hate-filled nutcase gets himself killed in Paris. There is nothing to be learned here in terms of improving our national security. No reason, really, for any politician to tweet about it. But it's another opportunity (they are limitless) for Trump to dial up the alarm. The Muslims are attacking everyone. Be afraid! I will save you! It is a dark, dark fantasy. Back in reality, Muslims who are justifiably nervous about the security of their mosques: you don't count. Your lives don't matter. You're not one of us. That's the message we get from Trump. I do not say this lightly: never before has such an unhinged, unprepared and dangerous man occupied the White House. Yes, indeed: get smart U.S! Get this man impeached and out of office before it's too late.
It is Trump himself, of course, who is sewing American carnage. His narcissism is violent ad dangerous. (How about that little detail that the bully retweets from the POTUS account his own nonsense posted a little earlier on his "real" account.) The bully has worn no clothes for quite a while now. He is pathetic. But no fearing the bully. Stand up. Embrace the weak, the unprotected. Let's keep working to heal American carnage. The bully must go.

"Global Astonishment"

It was a beautiful yesterday in Malaga. A day to be out in the country with friends and some of our students. In a relaxed moment after lunch (stewed wild boar!) one friend, an older woman who is clearly conservative in her political views, asked me casually "What's with Trump? That man is not well." I get asked this on a daily basis. Rejection of Trump in Spain is near universal. (Now, we know we can't give too much credence to polls, but one survey taken right around the time of the election showed his support among Spaniards at 3%. It gives you a notion.) Spain, of course, is by no means unique. The top headline of one of Spain's major dailies, El País, at this moment (Monday, January 30, early a.m.) is "Trump Sticks to Migratory Veto in Spite of Judicial Setbacks and Global Astonishment." I was struck by the phrase "global astonishment" ("estupor global" in the original). A more literal translation would be, of course, "stupor" or "stupefaction". That seems to capture quite well the feeling here and no doubt around the globe: people really are feeling stupefied. The world has been turned upside down, with the United States of America projecting itself to all as a place of intolerance, xenophobia, and cowardice. It is disheartening, to say the least. The damage Trump has done in one brief week to US standing in the world is, yes, stupefying. On Spanish state TV (in theory independent of government meddling, but in reality reflective of the current conservative government) it is already normal to hear reporters use the adjectives "totalitarian" and "dictatorial" when reporting about Trump. That is not an alternative fact.
While signing his most recent, and for now most notorious, executive order, Trump said, "We only want to admit those into our country who will support our country and love deeply our people." (Awkward! And bizarre, to say the least.) By signing that order he immediately insured that the millions of visitors from all over the world who are not affected by this ridiculous policy will be much less inclined to "love deeply our people." Trump, of course, is oblivious to this. In a few hours I will be interviewing students from the University of Málaga who have applied for a scholarship to spend next year at Dickinson College. Will they be as enthusiastic as in years past?

"Malignant Narcissism"

My first post on this blog ended with a reference to Trump's narcissism. I'm going to comment a little further on this as I just read a brief article about Dr. John D. Gartner breaking the APA code of ethics and offering a public diagnosis of Trump without having evaluated him. His conclusion: Trump suffers from "malignant narcissism." He wrote that "Donald Trump is dangerously mentally ill and temperamentally incapable of being president." (Gartner is in private practice as a psychotherapist but also teaches psychiatric residents at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine.) I was not familiar with this exact term, but I was happy to see it. For about a year I've been referring to Trump as a "malevolent narcissist." It is hard to imagine that Gartner did not mediate at length about his decision to break his profession's code of ethics. He will be harshly criticized, both from the political right and from his peers. At the moment I'm not so interested in the ethical debate. The deed is done and no doubt the CIA has taken notice. Gartner can expect to hear from them very shortly. The national security apparatus will not ignore this. Maybe his diagnosis is wrong. Maybe. But the public display of symptoms is occurring on an almost daily basis. He whines, he lashes out, he self-congratulates... If high ranking officials in the security apparatus conclude that Gartner has made a reasonable diagnosis, what next? Perhaps leaders in Congress will get the message to take it seriously. (I actually don't see that as likely to happen. At least for now.) Trump himself will see this news of course. And he will rage. Unless Bannon or someone else close can convince him to keep quiet, he will call Gartner a loser. A tricky proposition, even trickier than disparaging major media outlets or highly regarded figures in the entertainment world. But Trump could easily play this as more evidence that the "liberal elites" are out to get him and that Johns Hopkins School of Medicine is just another bastion of the left. Based on actions taken in his first week in office, I do believe the person currently in occupying the oval office is dangerously mentally ill. Yes, it is frightening.

The Problem with "Patriotic Devotion"

On January 25th the United States Federal Register published a text signed by Trump on Inauguration Day. The document, titled "National Day of Patriotic Devotion," has received relatively little media attention because this kind of presidential proclamation is merely symbolic and has no legal impact on anything. Furthermore, there's nothing newsworthy in the gesture itself. The act of signing a symbolic declaration on inauguration day is a fairly recent tradition that began with the presidency of George H.W. Bush. Trump's statement declares his own inauguration "a day of Patriotic Devotion." This is troubling to me. In familiar and predictable fashion, there is not a hint of humility. Rather, the use of the words "sacred" (as in "sacred values and heritage") and "devotion" strike a tone that suggests an authoritarian call to worship. Trump worship. (In fairness, it should be pointed out that in 2009 Obama's proclamation also used the word "sacred"; in his case, referring to the "sacred oath" he had just taken.) For me, the problem is that devotion, by definition, is a sentiment, a posture, that is unquestioning, and patriotism should never be unquestioning. This is especially true for a society that proclaims liberty and democracy as core values. Unquestioning devotion is simply incompatible with democracy. And with freedom. Indeed, unquestioning patriotism has been the drug of choice used by despots throughout history to further enslave those they rule over. (Justin McCurry, writing in The Guardian, points out the use of this phrase in North Korean propaganda.) So what to make of this? Sadly, tragically, this is who Trump is. His megalomania is well documented. And his constant slamming of the media (don't forget how he would continually set his crowds on the press corps during the campaign) illustrates quite well his inability to accept either any kind of criticism or to engage in real dialogue. These are, of course, among the symptoms of a narcissist. He will not change. Resistance.