My Newsletter, Your Comments, and a Thank You!
The Power of Principle versus the Principle of ‘Power’
I began my own publication, or newsletter as I sometimes refer to it here, on Substack in March of 2022 with ”Prescription for Survival 2022.” It was the second anniversary of the initial ”Prescription for Survival,” which I and my colleagues at the World Mental Health Coalition had immediately rushed forth within the very first month of the Covid pandemic. Now, my own writing has greatly expanded since, with some 125 essays.
I wish sincerely to thank all of you who are subscribing and of course especially those of you who are paid subscribers, which is very helpful and encouraging for me. And I also wish sincerely to thank those of you who have added your comments and have sometimes exchanged views with one another as well as with me. I encourage all of you to do so in the year ahead, one which we all know will be critical in many ways. And please allow me ask this favor: please let your friends and colleagues know about my Substack publication and urge them to subscribe as well. If you would like, you can easily gift a subscription through this link.
I greatly learn from your comments, even if I cannot always respond to them. They add further understanding and analysis of often complex issues, and your thoughtfully critical comments help me and others to reflect. Here is a recent example from a few days ago:
Dr. Lee,
I so much admire all you have done for so long now, from the beginning of the Trump nightmare in fact, to so professionally warn the nation about the unique, the unprecedented, dangers of Donald Trump being the American President with all of the actual as well as “bully pulpit” powers of that office…. I do very much realize that your latest tremendously insightful essay about “The Much More Dangerous Case of Donald Trump”, with your strong endorsement of the Colorado Supreme Court decision that Trump is an insurrectionist barred by the Constitution from running for office, comes with so much credibility and consideration from you….
But my motivation for writing you this comment to your recent essay is fear that I’m having a hard time escaping…. The fear I’ve been unable to shake is that what the Colorado Supreme Court has done, we all now know by a closely divided 4 to 3 decision with all the judges associated with the Democratic Party, as well as Trump never even having been actually charged with an “insurrection”, may thus very seriously backfire. Let me try to summarize my concerns:
First, resulting from the Colorado decision and the legal proceedings it unleashes, there is likely to be a further “Trump Bump” in the polls, for sure in his core support, and in his Rallies and fund-raising….
Second, what the Colorado decision has done is to thrust this whole matter into the hands of the Supreme Court forcing it to act probably in a quick and decisive way. With my own legal education, my expectation is the Court will abruptly reverse, thus deciding the issue of the 14th amendment for the nation….
Third, even if the Court does reverse as expected, unless it does so by an overwhelming vote, the very legitimacy of that institution may be further eroded, the Court will be further considered a political rather than legal institution….
Fourth, on the other hand, if, as seems very unlikely, the Court should refrain in some way from reversing the Colorado decision that will result in legal and political chaos as already more than a dozen States have court challenges underway….
Fifth, the likelihood at this point is that Trump and Biden will be involved in a historic “rematch”. Many have been publicly writing how much they fearfully predict Trump may in fact win….
Sixth, seems to me that Trump, whose mental problems you have so educated us all about, will use what is happening to his advantage…. If Trump is declared defeated he will be able to claim that a vast conspiracy tried to imprison him, defame him, cripple him, bankrupt him, tie him up in court, and keep him off some ballots; and so the election was fraudulent and his supporters should rise up.
… my great fear is that what is happening now may actually assist Trump in his mad determination to regain the White House, maybe helping him succeed in doing so!
And so I write you about your most recent essay hoping you can somehow assure me I’m wrong….
This is a comment I received on a recent article I published. As the commentator notes, I bring my own background of mental health and violence studies to the issue, not the law, political science, history, or sociology. However, the nation has seen how any effort can be turned on its head and weaponized against itself, because the underlying mental health problem has not been dealt with. This is the definition of mental capacity: capacity, or fitness, is required before one can embark on a task, any task. Usually, fitness is presumed until proven otherwise, but we have had a case where Donald Trump’s mental unfitness was well proven, and yet was allowed to spread its influence unchecked. I therefore think not in terms of, “Will this strategy work legally?”—we cannot yet go there—but, “How can we contain this mental health crisis, so that the existing devices can work?” An interdisciplinary dialogue is therefore critical.
Since the comment, Maine has come on board, and more and more people are talking about Amendment Fourteen, Section Three. In my view, this is already progress. All I ask is: as a democracy, will we hold certain principles as inviolable, applying to all people, or will we hold certain people in power as inviolable, so that they are above principles such as the law or mental fitness?
There was more to the commentator’s arguments and more to my response, but let me just say that I share the concerns and fears, and the conversations should continue. So, for now allow me to repeat what I mentioned at the start: I truly appreciate your comments! Please continue to make them in the year ahead. And please realize that you can send your comments privately as in this case, make them anonymously in public, or give your name and encourage others to respond to your comments.
Thank you enormously for your support and encouragement! We are all in this together, as we shall be through 2024!
The amendment 14 Section 3 cases are simply elgibility cases. Trump has not been "thrown off" anything. Wreck is simply not eligible just like Arnold Schwarzenegger because Arnold is not a "natural born" citizen.
Obama is not eginleb either because he has already been President twice. My favorite Congressman is not eligible neither because he is not even 30 years old. Too young. A candidate must be 35.
In Colorado anyone can bring an eligibility case. In Maine it must be the Secretary of State. In BOTH states the lack of elgibility is stayed subject to further judicial review.
There have been about 8 such DQ's since the Civil War. There are some 16 other state cases pending EACH with its specific state procedures.
If SCOTUS is gutless there are at least a half dozen ways SCOTUS can avoid a definitive ruling on the merits.
Hope not on such easy cases.
Reading Dr. Lee's essay today brought to mind the Roman concept of "virtu", which means, simply, 'doing the right thing, even when no one else is looking'. Virtu is the moral opposite of 'getting power and wealth, as much as you can, any way you can'. Which concept do you think best describes the moral standard of our current Congresspersons our Supreme Court Justices?
Cicero lived and died in a corrupt Roman leadership era that very much resembles our own. He argued for virtu on the floor of the Senate and was executed for it at the behest of Marc Anthony. His head and hands were nailed to the door as a warning to those who would speak truth to power.