Making Enemies Who Will Not Forget

The subtext of the current 100% GOP tax plan is to empower the rich under the completely disproven mantra that if rewarded with these massive tax cuts the rich will shower the country with new, high-paying jobs. All this while forcing both state and federal governments to reduce, dismantle or destroy support for social programs – from Medicare, Medicaid, Affordable Care Act or state equivalents should any state want to protect its own residents – and federal administrative agencies that are designed to protect ordinary Americans from massive corporate power. It gets worse: the federal corporate tax rates would be permanent, but the individual tax cuts would expire on their own. This is income redistribution on steroids, pushing income inequality to new levels of unfairness. The rich get so much richer.

How can the feds stop states from passing or continuing their own social programs? After all, under the 10th Amendment, states have precisely reserved that power to themselves. Easy. If individual taxpayers in those states with the largest urban populations (where social programs are really needed), most of which are blue, cannot deduct state against federal income tax (as they can now while big corporations will still be entitled to deduct those taxes under the new law), the new combined state and federal individual income tax burden will be so pronounced that voters are likely to press for lower state spending to reduce those soon-to-be-nondeductible state income taxes. And that grassroots push is most likely to be evidenced by cutbacks in state social programs.

If those blue states – like California, New York, New Jersey, etc. – do not reduce that tax burden, businesses will lose high-profile employees to lower tax states, and the overall impact on local economies, from reduced net income to lower housing sales (the latter further accelerated by a proposed cap on deductible property taxes), will ripple through every segment of the local economy. It’s not exactly an accidental consequence of the GOP tax plan; it is punishment against those states where Republicans have little or no clout with the voters.

Meanwhile, the legislation is tripping all over itself with little “gifts” to ultra-right wing constituents, particularly evangelical fundamentalists. For example, the prohibition against religious organizations (who would have otherwise lost their tax exempt status) from getting directly involved in political campaigns (“if you vote for a Democrat, you will face damnation for all eternity”) is being repealed in the fine print of the proposed bill.

Supported by negative numbers from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, some Republicans want a mechanism to undo some of the proposed elements if, as is incredibly likely, the “tax reform act” does not deliver the promised overall economic uplift. “One key change sought by [Bob Corker (R-Tennessee)] and other senators — inserting a trigger mechanism to roll back the tax breaks if economic growth doesn’t cover costs as promised — was met with strong opposition from big business and conservatives, including a group backed by the influential Koch brothers that has been running digital ads and robocalls targeting wavering senators on tax cuts.

“Instead, GOP senators began floating an alternative trigger mechanism that would impose automatic spending cuts to prevent deficits. But that idea also ran into resistance from some lawmakers… ‘The trigger has been a moving target,’ said Sen. Susan Collins, a Maine Republican, who said she had agreed to vote to open debate but was not yet supportive of the tax plan…Collins won a commitment from McConnell to address healthcare fixes to prevent insurance premium increases if the tax bill includes a repeal of the Affordable Care Act requirement that all Americans have health insurance…

“Experts say the approach provides more benefit to big businesses and wealthy individuals than average Americans… Studies show that while most Americans, on average, would see tax cuts, some taxpayers — especially lower- and middle-income filers — would see tax hikes, especially once the reduced rates expire… The package will add $1.5 trillion to the deficit, and some senators complain there has not been enough analysis to see if economic growth will cover those costs as Republicans argue.” Los Angeles Times, November 30th.

Even as every GOP Congress-person knows this tax act is deeply flawed, even though no such massive reform has passed without bipartisan support (nonexistent here), the GOP rush to pass “something big” while the 51 vote rule remains in effect and prior to the 2018 midterms is so great that the bill is close to passage in the Senate, after which it would go to the House for “reconciliation” with the House version passed earlier. The GOP leadership is inserting provisions that are concessions to individual members of Congress (Collins got a tiny increase in teachers’ ability to deduct the cost of school supplies, for example) just to get one vote. For deficit hawks, the Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has pledged further cuts to those social programs (which include Medicare and Social Security).

The hero who saved repeal of the Affordable Care Act, whom many believed would save the day again – Arizona Republican Senator John McCain – apparently could no longer face the deluge of conservatives pressing for this massive corporate give-away. On November 29th, McCain finally committed to the bill: “I believe this legislation, though far from perfect, would enhance American competitiveness, boost the economy, and provide long overdue tax relief for middle class families.”

But as I pointed out in my November 29th The Deep Dark Republican Hole blog, this 51-vote rule is an anomaly that will not survive into the next Congress or even the next presidency… unless the Senate in the future is able to mount a repeal and reform effort with an impossible-to-reach 60 vote majority. We may be stuck with one of most destructive pieces of tax legislation in American history for a very long time. Will it really pass? We'll know soon.

I’m Peter Dekom, and the United States has become a model to the world for how voter restrictions and manipulation can preserve incumbent power and distort the democratic process.

The Deep Dark Republican Hole

Gary Cohn (left) is the poster boy for an out-of-touch advocate for America’s elite. Donald Trump appointed former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. President and Chief Operating Officer Cohn as director of the National Economic Council and charged him – with Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin (right with his “born to shop” wife) – with writing the “tax reform act” that is awkwardly pushing its way through Congress. Approved by the House, the bill sits in the US Senate under a rule that allows a simple majority of Senators to pass the bill. The headline is that the bill would permanently reduce the federal corporate tax rate from 35% to 20% and generate a massive $1.5 trillion deficit (more if you take the equation out more than ten years). And watch those health insurance premiums skyrocket even more if eliminating that healthcare mandate gets repealed under this “soak the poor and the middle class” tax package gets passed.

As I have blogged so many times before (most recently, It’s Just Getting So Much Worse, from November 16^th and Understanding Automation, from November 10^th), massive new corporate cash from tax cuts, as evidenced on numerous occasions (e.g., the Reagan era tax cut allowing companies to repatriate foreign earnings or the Kansas dramatic reduction in corporate taxes), will not create new or better-paying jobs. It may foment stock buybacks or mergers/acquisitions, which in turn require new efficiencies (read: massive layoffs) to justify the financial cost. The minimal capital investment – and it is minimal – tends to go into automated equipment that replaces human workers. The rest? Dividends to shareholders.

Doubt me? Let’s ask America’s top corporate CEOs what they intend to do with this windfall for the rich. “Gary Cohn, the top White House economic advisor, was onstage making the Trump administration’s case that a huge cut in corporate taxes would trigger a surge of business investments.

“Then came an off-the-cuff question to business leaders listening to Cohn at the Wall Street Journal CEO Council meeting [in mid-November]: How many will increase investments if the Republican tax plan is enacted?

“TV coverage showed about three dozen executives sitting near the stage. Only three of them appeared to raise their hands. An incredulous Cohn responded: ‘Why aren’t the other hands up?’

“A video clip of that moment, which has become popular viewing in Washington, illustrates what many economists regard as a flaw in the administration’s main selling point for the Republican tax proposal: the argument that a dramatic cut in the U.S. corporate tax rate will be a boon to America’s middle class.

“The White House Council of Economic Advisers promises that the corporate tax cut, to 20% from 35%, would lead to an increase of at least $4,000 a year in average household income… But that calculation depends on an assumption that workers would get a much bigger cut of the corporate tax savings than most economic studies — including those by the Treasury Department and Congressional Budget Office — have shown.” Los Angeles Times, November 25^th.

Here’s the rub. If this corporate boondoggle does pass and get signed into law, the corporate tax breaks are permanent but the questionable “tax breaks” for the middle class have an automatic expiration date. And those middle class breaks slam those living in high income tax states or those who live where real estate values are far above the national average. While corporations could still deduct those local taxes, human beings and small businesses could not.

Further, those who rely on social benefits – like the elderly who are on Medicare or Social Security or those receiving healthcare with federal subsidies – will face benefit reductions to pay for the tax cuts accorded to the richest in the land. Just watch those health insurance premiums skyrocket even more if eliminating that healthcare mandate gets bundled under this “soak the poor and the middle class” tax package gets passed. Oh, and if you are making $30K or less, you can certainly expect a tax increase according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office.

To make the situation that much worse, the loophole that allows the Senate to pass this abomination masquerading as “tax reform” by a simple majority – circumventing the cloture rule requiring a 60 vote majority to bring a bill to a vote – will not apply to any attempt to undo this legislation later. It will thus take this 60 vote majority for any future amendment, and unless the Democrats (now a minority in the Senate) have those 60 votes – unlikely in the near-term expected political environment – that tax bill is unamendable any time soon (they would also have to have a majority in the House and the presidency). The GOP – fearing a future in which their vision becomes obviously unsustainable – wants to insure that there is little the Democrats can do to change their legacy.

For the skeptics, even those in the GOP who doubt this tax reform bill can actually pass – and sticking the GOP by itself with any and all consequences – there is this little note from the November 28^th New York Times: “Passage of the tax overhaul, which seemed uncertain on Monday [11/27], strengthened considerably on Tuesday [11/28] after the Senate Budget Committee voted along party lines to advance the plan [towards a full Senate floor vote]. A flurry of last-minute deal making helped garner the support of a few Republican lawmakers who had expressed concerns about the $1.5 trillion package, including its treatment of small businesses and its effect on the deficit.” The last major tax reform bill to pass was bipartisan. This bill will not carry a single Democratic vote. Rush. Rush. Rush. Pass something and make it virtually impossible to reverse.

Between layering in conservative judges to the federal bench and passing this horrific “tax reform” package, the GOP is simply digging the entire United States into a deep dark hole. As the rest of the world adjusts (read: developing a work-around) to the Trump administration’s withdrawal from international treaties, trade as well as environmental, we can expect an “I told you so” response from nations everywhere… as they watch us struggle with decisions based on mythology, opinion, and alternative facts… and as the unforgiving real world goes in an entirely different direction, leaving us in our own dust.

I’m Peter Dekom, and as much damage as we are doing to ourselves now, it pales in comparison with the legacy we are leaving future generations of Americans… as long as there is an America.

The Democratic Strategy against Republicans

• ·         Just say “no.” You ain’t got the votes anyway. It worked for the Republicans against Obama.
• ·         Let the Republicans do themselves in. The more they propose programs, the worse they look.
• ·         Fight endlessly with each other, making absolutely certain no clear unifying leaders or platform emerge. Progressives vs liberal elites: Propose expensive and unrealistic socialist programs that terrify middle America or enhance your swamp-like traditional elitist dreams and ignore the people looking for a real direction in exceptionally confusing and disruptive times. Ignore who we have become!
• ·         Continue to run against Donald Trump even in local elections, letting barely-articulate GOP candidates promise the moon and address the local issues that matter most to local voters. Forget that Donald Trump is getting credit for a soaring stock market and a lower level of unemployment.
• ·         Continue to stumble through a rather dramatic failure to understand the power of social media. Make sure to send tons of emails to your supporters that begin with the words, “devastating news,” begging for money, and just wear them out.
• ·         Complain and whine, praying that Bob Mueller will deliver the coup de grace.
• ·         Ignore the elephant in the economic room: automation, the great income inequality machine. Kind of like forgetting that “it’s the economy stupid” is not just a GOP issue!!!!
•  

The Dems need issues? Really? Let’s look at ourselves the way our greatest global competitor sees us, the People’s Republic of China, a pretty statistically supported view. Maybe this is why China views passing America in global economic and political dominance as little more than a slam dunk. We are self-destructing. In the words of a fictional senior Chinese governmental official created by former acting director and deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Michael Morell, writing for the November 23^rd The Cipher Brief:

“The U.S. is sick – that is the word I use. The evidence for this judgment is compelling. Productivity growth, the lifeblood of any economy, has fallen sharply since the mid 1990s, and it has been weak since the late 1960s. Wealth and income inequality have increased substantially; the gap in wealth between the rich and poor is staggering; the U.S. is now an outlier among developed countries. The American dream – the Horatio Alger story – is fading into a memory; the probability of someone born in a lower income group moving to a higher one has declined, and many parents no longer believe that their children will have a better standard of living than them. These are all fundamental changes from the period after WWII.

“Social divisions and social erosion have grown. Racial, ethnic, and religious tensions are on the rise; in polling, large numbers of Americans admit to holding discriminatory views of blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and Muslims. It was once considered socially unacceptable to express racist views, but that norm is breaking down. Drug addiction is a serious problem across the entire society; drug overdoses are now the leading cause of death for Americans under 50, with a clear link to economic conditions.

“Your political elite – your professional political class – has simply not dealt successfully with the country’s problems. As a group, they are, in short, incompetent. They have been so for at least a generation. How could you come to any other conclusion? This is a view shared by many of your own citizens. They do not believe that your government works. In the primaries for the 2016 election, more votes were cast for political outsiders than for professional politicians. That speaks volumes.

“When I look at your country, I sense lost confidence. I see it in many of your citizens and politicians blaming other countries for your own problems. I saw it in the resonance of President Trump’s campaign slogan ‘Make American Great Again.’ I saw it in President Obama’s statement that the U.S. would remain a global power for the next 100 years. Only someone not quite sure about that would need to say it.” Dems, do you really need a foreign power to find your issues for you? Seriously? When has “obvious” been so difficult to see?

I’m Peter Dekom, and other than GOP doing itself in – which just might work – the only real thing that Republicans have going for them is the rather complete failure of the Democratic Party to mount a coherent counter campaign that sticks to voters.

It’s All About the Rich, About the Rich, Not the Base

If you can figure out the underlying vectors of Donald Trump’s policies, they would seem to divide into two clear paths: words and social policies for his base (salesman Trump), substance and hard dollars for the rich (wealthy guy Trump). Since in the President’s limited view of the political connectivity of the world, foreign policy is a place to show the base how tough you can be without, he believes, serious domestic consequences – a place where he can apply his very questionable The Art of the Deal techniques (bully + hyperbole = a good deal for me), international relations are nothing more than a stage for his machismo.

It helps to raise false problems – like globalization as the evil that destroys American jobs (forget that globalization hasn’t been an issue for years… it’s the automated machines owned by his rich buddies that are tanking blue collar employment) – and then “solve” them by getting rid of cheap foreigners in our midst (read: immigrants) and pulling out of multinational treaties in the unfounded hopes that the world will then kowtow to America’s demand that going forward trade agreements must be bilateral. Callous and misdirected policies that will only make life more expensive for most Americans.

He can embrace social conservatism, because there are no apparent hard costs associated with being anti-LGBT, pro white Christian, pro law enforcement (at the expense of minority rights), anti-abortion rights, and pro any form of overt patriotism. He can appear pro-jobs by eliminating environmental regulations, since measuring damage directly-related to man-induced climate change is hard to measure with any precision. He thus can make raw statements without worrying about the real consequences.

Trump also can use those “words” to suggest that all those pro-business biased “cut taxes and reduced regulations” are simply pro-job-creation, even though most tangible measures of the implementation of such choices by past state and federal administrations clearly show that such policies have had the opposite effect. By maintaining a “swamp” theory, when those policies fail to produce the desired results, he has an easy target to blame: the old line Republicans and all Democrats, the courts and the federal bureaucracy that he has labeled the “swamp.” That the stock market is soaring, in drooling anticipation of massive corporate tax cuts, he can take credit for “solid economic growth.” That unemployment numbers look better belies the lower levels of pay for those without college educations and the vast numbers of workers who have simply given up looking for work altogether.

When it comes to those who constitute Trump’s base, however, his policies seem focused on decimating what little economic strength they have left, pretending that such efforts will restore moribund obsolete rust belt and resource extraction jobs that are never coming back. His policies have eviscerated the Consumer Protection Agency, the Environmental Protection Agency, forced consumers into one-sided arbitration favoring financial institutions (vs. being able to go to court), sabotaged the surviving portions of the Affordable Care Act forcing premiums to skyrocket and insurers to opt out of healthcare exchanges in the resulting uncertainty, and his proposed changes in the federal tax code that will inevitably raise taxes for the middle class while heaping massive benefits to major U.S. corporations and massively expanded the federal deficit.

The Trump administration’s latest assault on the “little guy” comes in the form of a proposed repeal of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rule in favor of “net neutrality.” That rule forbids internet service providers (ISPs) from giving content providers (including their own affiliates) any bandwidth priorities or in encumbering content providers with slower download speeds. This effort to level the playing field was intended to maximize internet access on an equal basis for all. It does not allow rich content providers to pay ISPs to prioritize their services over their competitors (a cost passed on to consumers, and one which the bigger services can afford while smaller content providers simply cannot match) or slow down delivering content from services that do not pay the ISPs (unless the consumer is willing to bear an additional fee to speed up delivery).

This is great news for ISPs, who would be able to generate hundreds of millions of dollars, if not billions, in extra fees – to content providers as well as consumers – to get the same level of internet access they currently enjoy without those extra costs. The Trump-dominated FCC claims that this will spur “innovation,” a stupid suggestion for an industry that is already forced by existing levels of competition to innovate or die. Do you really believe that the Silicon Valley needs more encouragement to innovate? But the FCC has joined the profoundly anti-consumer march that is the hallmark of the entire Trump administration.

“Mr. [Ajit] Pai, who was appointed [FCC] chairman by President Trump in January, has eliminated numerous regulations during his first year… The agency has stripped down rules governing television broadcasters, newspapers and telecom companies that were meant to protect the public interest. On Tuesday, in addition to the net neutrality rollback, Mr. Pai announced a plan to eliminate a rule limiting any corporation from controlling broadcasts that can reach more than 39 percent of American homes.

“The fight over net neutrality could end up being one of his biggest and most fraught decisions. For more than a decade, the agency has struggled with how to regulate internet service, leading to extended legal battles. The rules adopted under Mr. Wheeler were upheld in 2016 by a federal appeals court in Washington.

“The proposal released on Tuesday will probably make its way to court as well. And companies like Google and Facebook are expected to push the public to speak out against the plan. They coordinated a huge online protest against the possible changes in July.

“Some of the lobbying could take place in Congress, even though it may change little because Republicans control both houses. Nevertheless, Democrats have vowed to try to reconstruct the strict rules adopted by the F.C.C. in 2015.” New York Times, November 21^st.

But even if the FCC were to adopt this additional anti-consumer stances on net neutrality, ISPs need to be acutely aware that with the next Democratic administration, this will be one of the first FCC actions to be reversed. As to the bigger picture, the next Democratic administration will probably be consumed with reversing the bulk of Trump administration anti-consumer, anti-environmental, foreign policy missteps and lopsided give-aways to corporate America… to the extent these even can be reversed. Polarization continues on steroids!

I’m Peter Dekom, and with the well-preplanned “blame” coefficient in place, Trump’s base continues to be sheep being led to slaughter… by their own unwitting choice.

And the Winner Is: No One

Using power to force or bargain for sexual favors is obviously pretty disgusting. But this form of harassment has been around throughout recorded history. It took a long period of social evolution, where brains replaced brawn as the greatest individual value-creator – and we still have a long way to go. As more women ascended to political, economic and social stature, the very notion of “alpha male entitlement” has literally split our society into a great debate, one that really should not be necessary. Forcing sex is now and always has been wrong; significant sections of our criminal code so attest.

We have a president whose own words suggest that he still believes in that alpha male entitlement, followed by a coterie of older un- or under-employed white males clamoring for their now-obsolete brawn-based jobs back. The world of sexual power still hovers above them as the ethos with which they were raised. But today, we have women who have finally generated enough mass confidence to bring out the sexual challenges that they have faced their entire lives. It is time to end sexual harassment, stamp it out, crush it and bury the notion that it is ever acceptable.

But the victims are not just the women and men who have faced the ugly hand of sexual predation. The sacrifices go across the board, from the families of the abusers to those who make their livelihoods within companies and projects now collapsing because their economic pillar has become a pariah. Direct employees and even accountants, agents, lawyers, secretaries, assistants, vendors join the fray... oh some lawyers do pretty well (charging fortunes to defend or mount the claims)… but not those who spent years building those careers. Aren’t these the enablers of the sexual misfeasance? Some, yes. Most, no.

“The consequences of what has become known as the ‘Weinstein fallout’ extend far beyond the alleged harassers and their many victims. The projects of the accused have been tarnished along with their names: movies pulled, TV shows canceled, magazines shut down. These cancellations don’t just punish the perpetrators who caused them: They affect everyone involved.

“Countless innocent people—actors, crew members, writers, editors, publicists, designers—have lost time and effort on projects that will never see the light of day, all because of the actions of the men they were unfortunate enough to work with. Production companies find themselves in a difficult situation: to proceed or not to proceed? Even prior to Kevin Spacey’s replacement by Christopher Plummer, TriStar was quick to confirm that Ridley Scott’s All the Money in the World would go ahead, saying ‘A film is not the work of one person. There are over 800 other actors, writers, artists, craftspeople and crew who worked tirelessly and ethically on this film … It would be a gross injustice to punish all of them for the wrongdoings of one supporting actor in the film.’

“Others have lost valuable opportunities, professional breakthroughs, or meaningful roles they will no longer get to play. Trans actress Jen Richards revealed on Twitter last week [early November] that she had been set to voice a trans character in Louis C.K.’s now-canceled animated series The Cops. Richards said she was celebrating the ‘sea change’ in gendered power dynamics and benefits it would bring, but was nevertheless mourning (understandably) the momentous role she would no longer get to play.

“While the impact on these people is nowhere near as grave as that faced by the victims of harassment, it’s nonetheless sad that so many lives and careers have been swept up in the storm.” Rachel Withers writing for the November 17^th Slate.com. Mostly they’re not the overpaid rich folks, just regular people working for a wage or a modest salary. Picture men and women with tool belts. And that just show-biz. Good place to generate highly visible news stories. Now charges of harassment have roiled through the political arena, taking down popular incumbents along with rising candidates, and are now searing through corporate America, planting disruption and concomitant job loss wherever charges are made.

What’s even worse is the few who see an opportunity to make false claims – or threaten to make such claims (extortion they know no prosecutor will touch) – unless vast sums of money are paid. And there are plenty of lawyers ready to take up those causes as well. In the current atmosphere, you are guilty if charged, punished as if convicted and crushed without the slightest effort at due process. And real due process, through the courts, can take years. By then, there is little career left to resurrect.

People tend to remember the charges and not the court’s ultimate determination of innocence. These false claimants cheapen the real pain and suffering of genuine victims. Cloaked in the vector of societal outrage, they seem justified in their false quest. But how can we ever tell the difference? Fortunately, the overwhelming number of victims stepping forward are both credible and genuine.

So for those who know that the mere charge of abuse could destroy their careers, justified or not, they are tempted to pay no matter what. But since there appears to be no such thing as a sustainable confidentiality agreement in this space, nor should there be (you cannot cover up crime by contract), the mere act of paying seems an admission of guilt. Heads, I win, tails you lose. The public seems unwilling to accept denials and very open to take down the high and mighty. It is true that the more claims asserted by credible victims, the higher the likelihood of actionable impropriety.

And what do we do with the results and proceeds of those defrocked for sexual abuse? When it comes to content, there are lots of innocents whose efforts get marginalized in the process. “Wrestling with what to do with the product of tainted executives, artists or news figures is not that far from the eternal issue of how (or even whether) to separate our views of art from our views of the artists. Wagner was blatantly anti-Semitic. Alfred Hitchcock abused actresses who worked for him, so openly that you can see his dysfunctional psychosexual power dynamics right onscreen. Roman Polanski was convicted of having sex with a 13-year-old, but does that mean ‘Rosemary’s Baby’ should have been pulled from circulation?

“Those were generally seen as rare cases that (perhaps) could be overlooked because of the men’s particular genius, or because times were different then. What has changed now is the unveiling of evidence that sexually predatory behavior is pervasive and that it has flourished in hierarchical, male-dominated industries that have at best ignored, and at worst enabled, such behavior by powerful and once-untouchable men.

“In the current period of reckoning, some are arguing that a wholesale expunging or erasure of work by sexual harassers is a small price to pay if it results in a thorough rethinking in creative industries, where the use of sex and power are particularly ill-defined and open to abuse…

The moves to yank television shows, to cancel future projects or — in the case of ‘House of Cards’ and ‘Transparent’ — to consider envisioning popular series without actors who are central to the works’ success, are hardly just a matter of simple morality. In the case of those two programs, there’s also the question of whether audiences would even want to watch them without Mr. Spacey and Jeffrey Tambor, their stars.

“And it’s difficult to discern to what extent these decisions are being based on matters of principle or economics or publicity or audience interests. Many companies contacted for this article, including Sony and Netflix, refused to comment. And though Netflix continues to show old episodes of ‘House of Cards’ as well as stand-up specials by Louis C.K., another network, HBO, not only eliminated Louis C.K. from its ‘Night of Too Many Stars’ comedy benefit on Nov. 18 but also removed his past work from its website.

“Some people, like the feminist scholar Camille Paglia, argue that art — no matter who created it — should be beyond the scope of punishment… ‘The artist as a person should certainly be subject to rebuke, censure, or penalty for unacceptable actions in the social realm,’ Ms. Paglia said via email. ‘But art, even when it addresses political issues, occupies an abstract realm beyond society.’” New York Times, November 24^th.

So the result is pain, some justified, some not. Disruption and trashing of lives. Think about all those hundreds of employees at The Weinstein Company who, regardless of a new buyer stepping in to take over (if that happens), will face layoffs simply because most if not all the company’s money will be needed to pay off claimants. Forced income redistribution? All because one man apparently lived his life crossing bright red line he just couldn’t bring himself to see.

There is a tsunami of popular outrage sweeping across our entire social structure. The power of the wave may just prevent sexual predators in the workplace like no other. To that extent, this is a force for good… and it is about time. But behind sweeping social trends hides the unfairness that is elevated along with the good. As this wave settles down, we need to restore reasonableness and balance to this entire process. Will time find paths to rehabilitation or the restoration of now-tainted art? And if so, how much time will that be?

I’m Peter Dekom, and in this time of dynamic change at every level, we need to be sensitive to the hardships of innocents swept along the tide.