Symmetries in Politics

I followed the Kavanaugh hearings.

I was sadden when I heard a speech in which Trump attacked Christine Blasey Ford. In the last few days, my Youtube stream has been filled with a deluge of conservative pundits heaping derision on Ms. Ford. There is so much hatred focused on this person that I feel sick.

It is possible that Ms Ford gave false testimony. But we don't know that. The case points out an interesting symmetry in judicial hearings.

The American Judicial system holds that a person is assumed innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is on the plaintiff. The plaintiff must present sufficient evidence to overcome reasonable doubt.

Acquitting a defendant does not mean that the plaintiff gave false testimony. The defendant might actually be guilty. The acquittal means the plaintiff failed to prove guilt.

When one accuses the plaintiff of perjury, thing switch. The original defender becomes the plaintiff and the original plaintiff becomes the defendant. In the perjury case, our assumption of innocence says that must hold that the testimony was true and the burden of proof lays on the original defendant who is now acting as the plaintiff.

The circus act surrounding the Ms. Ford's accusation was clearly out of place. I think there is a good chance that Ms. Ford gave false testimony. Just as there is insufficient evidence to prove her claim, there is insufficient evidence to disprove it.

In a cases like this, one has to take a step back and look at the system as a whole.

I suspect that there is a large number of people who are victims of abuse. Many are women and children. I fear that most abuse goes unreported.

When one looks at reported abuse, one finds a large number of suspect reports and a few outright false reports.

The abuse that occurs and the cases that show up in court are two different things that do not mesh up well.

Things get ugly when one looks at the nature of abuse.

An abuser, by character and definition, is a person who abuses other people. When a victim reports abuse, it is not uncommon for the abuser to increase their abuse. The abuser will call the victim a liar. Abusers are often skilled manipulators who will turn other people against the victim.

There is a reason why victims don't report abuse. Reporting abuse can make bad situations worse.

The Conservatives who are heaping derision on Ms. Ford are feeding into this abuse cycle.

Yes, conservatives should complain about the way that the Democrats handled the Kavanaugh nomination hearings. The criticism should focus on the political process. Conservative pundits should be smart enough not to attack Ms Blasey Ford.

Conservative pundits prove, time and time again, that they are as bad as left wing pundits. Conservatives almost always miss the subtleties of reason.

I wanted to talk about another interesting asymmetry that one finds in American politics.

The US Founders wanted to limit the power of the government. They built some interesting principles into our system of jurisprudence:

Notably: Our courts hold that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty. Our courts also hold the principle of freedom of association. We cannot be arrested simply for hanging with a bad crowd.

These restrictions limit the actions of the government. They do not restrict the actions of people.

The US is a Republic. We elect our leaders.

Our system does not place restrictions on the voters.

Voters are free to judge political candidates for their association. For that matter I think they should. People should vote against candidates who hang out with thieves. Personally, I vote against all candidates with close association with Goldman Sachs ... a known gang of thieves.

Voters are free to assume that political leaders are guilty of things without solid proof of guilt.

The principle of Freedom of Religion says that the government cannot take actions against people based on their religion. There is absolutely nothing wrong with people considering the religious beliefs of candidates during an election.

There is an asymmetrical relation between the way that the government judges individual people and the way that the people judge their leaders.

Accusations that would not hold up in a court of law might unseat a political candidate. I think that Ms. Ford's accusations were weak. If her accusations were given early on in the FBI investigation of Kavanaugh, they may have been sufficient to block his nomination.

The fact that Feinstein held onto the accusations until they would cause division is an indictment against Ms. Feinstein.

The political theater that took place during the nominations of Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh was disgusting.

The way that the Democrats used the accusation as a political attack changed the nature of the accusation. The political theater is the thing we need to address in discussing the nomination ... and not the accusation itself because we don't know if the accusation was true or false.

There is nothing wrong with denying a person a seat of power based on a hint of impropriety.

The US founders were seeking to limit the government. They were not seeking to limit the people. There are symmetries and asymmetries in the legal system.

I guess I should point out that there is an election on the horizon.

During this election, many people will vote for candidates based on the candidate's party. People who vote along party lines are essentially voting according to associations.

In conclusion. The way that the Democrats acted during the Kavanaugh hearings was awful. The way that conservative pundits attacked a women for reporting sexual abuse is just as bad.