Showing posts with label donald trump. Show all posts
Showing posts with label donald trump. Show all posts

Thursday, October 15, 2020

A deeper dive into COVID data: the politics of COVID spread

Most people who live in Ohio are probably aware by now that we're experiencing another new surge of COVID cases. If you hadn't seen yet, or if you don't live in Ohio, now you know: Ohio is experiencing another new surge of COVID cases.

But you might not know in what parts of Ohio most of those new cases are happening.

I live in Cleveland. I'm certainly very concerned and troubled by new spikes in COVID cases anywhere in Ohio or anywhere else for that matter, because I don't want people to get sick and die, but if I want to assess the current level of risk for myself or people around me, I want to know what's happening here in Cuyahoga county. So let's take a look at what's been happening in my county and elsewhere in the state.

I'm going to focus on new hospitalizations. New case counts are important, but are highly dependent on how many tests are being run and on who is being tested. To me, changes in hospitalization numbers are a better indication of how the spread of the disease is changing. (If you're interested, you can see county case data on the state government's COVID dashboard.)

Here's a graph of the hospital admissions in Cuyahoga county by day of the pandemic (all results in this post use the data made publicly available by the Ohio Department of Health):


It's important to note that the numbers from the most recent days are incomplete and will increase somewhat as time goes on. I do see a hint we might be starting to tick up after a long declining period. But there's certainly been no major spike here. In July we were briefly getting around 30 or more new admissions per day. Then the numbers steadily declined to the point where for much of September we only averaged around 2-3 admissions per day. That's quite an improvement!

What happened in July? As far as I can tell, the most important thing that happened in July was a mask mandate went into effect - first county specific mask mandates, but not long after, a statewide mandate. I suspect, though, that adherence to the mandate is not as good in some parts of the state as others.

Ohio has three major cities, Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati, that are in Cuyahoga, Franklin, and Hamilton counties, respectively. Wherever I go around Cleveland, people seem to be generally good about wearing masks now. I suspect that tends to be more true in large cities in general and less true in other parts of the state. Here's a graph showing changes in the new hospitalization numbers (per capita) for the three largest Ohio counties vs. the rest of the state:

(Note: this uses the extrapolation method I detailed in this post to get more accurate estimates for the recent days that have incomplete data.)

We can see that in the big cities, after the mask mandates went into effect there was a big decline and although there may be a recent uptick, the numbers have remained at a level that is close to the lowest since March. In the rest of the state combined, the recent spike has pushed the numbers to the highest level at any point during the pandemic.

I will say that although I think masks clearly help, they aren't the whole story - there are also many other factors that basically can be summarized as how seriously are people taking the pandemic and how seriously are people taking efforts to slow the spread.

Cuyahoga, by the way, has had the most dramatic improvement. From March through July in aggregate, out of 88 counties in Ohio we had the very worst per capita hospitalization rate. August? 53rd out of 88 (first being best). September, 23rd out of 88. And October thus far? 14th out of 88. So I think we should appreciate the efforts we've all made that have saved a lot of people from sickness and death.

Anyway, it occurred to me that this divergence between the big cities and the rest of the state could very well be related to how politicized the pandemic has become. We have a Republican president and we have a right wing media who have pounded into the heads of their followers messages like: COVID is just like the flu, masks don't work and/or might be dangerous and/or are "unmanly," stay-at-home orders were government tyranny, we should just open everything up and let "herd immunity" take over, etc., etc., etc. And it's very clear that as a result of this, Trump supporters are much less likely than the rest of the country to view COVID as continuing to be a serious threat that we have to continue to take serious measures to address, even as the deaths continue to pile up. So I decided to take a look at whether data support the hypothesis that this polarization is affecting COVID spread in Ohio.

Here's a graph of the per capita hospitalization numbers by county from August through today (August being the cutoff point because mask mandates went into effect in July) plotted against the share of the 2016 presidential election vote received by Donald Trump:

Indeed, we see that the more a county voted for Trump in 2016, the more likely it is that that county has had a bad COVID outbreak since the statewide mask mandate went into effect. I was actually surprised at the strength of the apparent effect - the two most pro-Trump counties are the two counties with the worst outbreaks!

Now, certainly, this is suggestive evidence but not proof that Trump support leads to worse COVID outbreaks. There are other potential explanations and I'm open to hearing them.

One alternate explanation that someone raised when I made a similar point recently, and that I don't buy, is that the reason outbreaks are now worse in rural areas is because the worse outbreaks that previously occurred in cities caused a population immunity effect that has subsequently slowed the spread in cities.

This explanation doesn't make sense, because even the hardest hit places in Ohio had nowhere near the fraction of the population become infected as somewhere like New York City. In New York City, nearly 3 out of every 1000 residents has died of COVID, whereas in Cuyahoga county, about 2 out of every 1000 residents has been hospitalized, to give an idea of the magnitude of the difference. Even in New York City it is questionable whether there has been enough population immunity to have a significant effect in slowing disease spread. In Ohio the idea is completely far-fetched.

But let's humor that explanation and address it with data. If cities in Ohio are now doing better because their previous worse outbreaks have caused a protective effect, we would expect that there would be an inverse relationship between how hard hit a county was in the earlier part of the pandemic and how hard hit it has been recently. Is there such a relationship?

No, there is not. There is no relationship whatsoever between hospitalization rate from March through July and hospitalization rate from August through the present. (There is a measure called R-squared of how strong a linear relationship is that goes from 0 (no correlation) to 1 (perfect correlation). The R-squared of this graph is literally 0.00. If you're curious, the R-squared of the previous graph on correlation with Trump support was 0.10, with a p-value of 0.002 - so the claim is not that Trump support guarantees a bad outbreak, but rather significantly increases the chances of one.)

So that takes us back to the explanation that rural counties are now tending to be hit worse because people there aren't taking the pandemic as seriously, which is probably related to Trump support.

This analysis is specific to Ohio, but I know that there exist data showing similar effects at both the county level and state level when looking all around the country.

So I guess the message is: the virus doesn't care whether you believe in it. In fact, the virus (if we are anthropomorphizing the virus) prefers it if you don't believe in it, because that makes it easier for the virus to infect you and people around you. If people don't take the pandemic seriously, these problems will only continue to get worse.

But the other message is, be concerned, but don't panic, about rising COVID numbers in Ohio. We collectively know so much more about how to stay safe than we did in March. If you take that knowledge into account and take measures to stay safe, you're much more likely to stay safe than if you ignore that knowledge. If you and all the people who live around you do that, it is possible to keep the numbers down. So keep wearing masks in public, and keep avoiding dangerous gatherings of people, especially crowded indoor gatherings. We are all in this together and the data suggest that in places where people believe that we are all in this together and act accordingly, the results will be better.

Friday, September 11, 2020

Never forget

And so another 9/11 is here.

I realized that this is the first September 11th on which it has, for me, been more than half a lifetime since the 9/11. That's a pretty weird thing to think about, and pretty hard to believe. But yeah, it's been 19 years since that horrible day that shook me, 18 years old and early in my first semester of college, to the core.

So that's one reason that this September 11 is different to me from those of past years.

I think there's something else, though, that makes this one really stand out, and take on a whole new meaning.

I still remember the feelings I had in the aftermath of those horrific terrorist attacks. To me at the time, it was the worst thing that had ever happened in my life. I felt so in a pit of despair that I legitimately wondered if I would ever truly feel happy again.

I was very young and naive. I had no idea of the ups and downs that life could bring.

9/11 was not the worst thing that has ever happened.

I don't want to be dismissive, though. It was a truly terrible thing.

As I reflect back on that day now, I think it's fitting that the anniversary this year comes in the same week that we received definitive audio proof that Donald Trump, in early February, was fully aware of the fact that COVID-19 was a terrible threat, and far more dangerous than the flu, and that all the statements he made to the contrary from that point on were not borne of mere ignorance but were brazen lies, and that it is therefore undeniable that he has the blood of tens if not hundreds of thousands of Americans on his hands.

Never forget 9/11. It's a refrain that has been hammered into us over and over.

Not that anyone who lived through that day could forget it.

But of course, "never forget" doesn't just mean that we should remember what happened. It means that there are lessons we should have learned from the events and those lessons should shape our lives and the actions we take both as individuals and as a country, into perpetuity.

Sadly, the people who are most apt to say "never forget" tend to be the people who took all the wrong lessons from those tragic events. Who used them as excuses for promoting xenophobia and endless war.

This has been clear for a long time. But now, the events of this year have fully revealed the utter hypocrisy and sheer moral depravity of the most vocal members of the "never forget 9/11" crowd.

The official death toll of the victims of the 9/11 attacks is 2977.

Each one of those deaths was a tragedy.

We changed so many things about our country in response to those attacks. Many of those changes were for the worse. All were promoted with the idea that we should do whatever it takes to stop something like that from happening again. Because "never forget."

For the last five-plus months, on average every two to three days a 9/11's worth of Americans has died from COVID-19. This didn't have to happen. Most of those deaths were preventable. If the federal government had taken decisive action at the start of the pandemic, and had committed our country's vast resources toward the challenge of containing the virus, and if our so-called leader had not lied and minimized the threat and encouraged his followers to not take it seriously, most of those people would still be alive.

The people who have been most loudly telling us over and over for the last 19 years to never forget those 2977 victims are the same people who are most likely to just shrug their shoulders at sixty 9/11s' worth (and still climbing, with the end nowhere in sight) of mostly preventable deaths.


What is happening in this country right now is kind of like if 9/11 was happening over, and over, and over, except the terrorists are the people in charge of the country, and we're currently in a campaign season where there's a real chance that those terrorists will be elected to another term.

Which is why on this 9/11 it's more important than on any before for us to say:

Never Forget.

Never forget this horrible tragedy that is unfolding all around us. And this time, let's collectively learn the right lessons from a horrible tragedy.

Donald Trump, by repeatedly lying to the American people to minimize the threat of COVID, and by deliberately slowing down testing efforts that could have helped contain the virus, and by doing numerous other things both before and during the pandemic that sabotaged our ability to effectively respond, is guilty of crimes against humanity. And we should never forget that. But we should also never forget that he's not the only guilty party.

Donald Trump is also the most corrupt and most criminal president in our nation's history. He does things pretty much every day that would fully warrant removal from office under the Constitution's impeachment clause. Early this year, before COVID became widespread in the U.S. but after the threat was already becoming apparent (on January 27, which was during the impeachment trial, USA Today published an op-ed by Joe Biden under the prophetic heading Trump is worst possible leader to deal with coronavirus outbreak), 53 Republican senators had the chance to do their constitutional duty and vote to remove Trump from office for his high crimes and misdemeanors. Only one, Mitt Romney, chose to put country over party.

They didn't know it at the time, but how many lives would have been saved if nineteen of Romney's Republican colleagues had joined him and the Democratic and independent senators and Trump had been removed?

(I'm not saying Mike Pence would have been the ideal president to lead the fight against COVID, but I doubt he'd have gone to nearly the levels Trump has in actively sabotaging our country's response.)

Trump has the blood of countless Americans on his hands. Trump is guilty of numerous acts of criminality and corruption and should have been removed from office many times over. Trump is also blatantly racist and blatantly misogynistic and a serial sex offender.

The Republican Party has stood nearly in lockstep behind him.

And the most distressing and depressing thing, the thing I never could possibly have imagined happening to this country when I think back to the events of 9/11/2001, is that about 40% of Americans are totally okay with this. Totally fine with all the damage Trump has done. Totally fine with their leader's failures and lies directly leading to the deaths of thousands upon thousands of their fellow citizens.

(We should also never forget that the toll of our country's failure on COVID is so much more than those hundreds of thousands of deaths. It's also in the perhaps equally large if not larger number of people left with long-term debilitating effects from the virus. It's also in all the people facing economic ruin thanks to Republicans' refusal to fund adequate relief packages. It's also in so many experiences that are normally parts of the fabric of our lives, precious time with our loved ones, celebrations and mourning, that we've had to sacrifice and will have to continue sacrificing as we continue to not contain the pandemic. We should never forget any of this.)

It's just bewildering that Trump's approval rating has only slightly budged through all of this horror. I never could have imagined it before I saw it actually all unfold before my eyes. I can only conclude that a dedicated right wing propaganda campaign that has been carried out over the course of the last few decades has twisted so many people's minds to the point where they have lost much of their ability to discern fact from fiction or right from wrong.

And so it's imperative that we never forget. Never forget Trump's crimes. But also never forget the crimes of his enablers in the Republican Party. And never forget the perhaps equally as heinous crimes of their enablers in the right wing media.

I know a lot of people who have voted Republican in the past and are now desperate to get Trump out of office. I know a lot of moderates and even liberals who are just desperate to get back to some sense of normalcy.

If Trump is gone next year and we collectively let out a big sigh of relief and then decide life is back to normal? If those never-Trump Republicans go back to voting Republican once Trump is off the ballot? If all those people who have become newly politically active decide their activism is no longer necessary?

Then we'll be just as doomed in the long run as we would be with a second Trump term.

The Republican Party and their right wing media allies are a far bigger threat to the people of this country than al Qaeda could ever have dreamed of being. Sixty 9/11s' worth and counting of COVID deaths make that clear. That threat isn't going to go away if Trump loses.

No decent, patriotic American should ever support the Republican Party again, at least until that party has completely remade itself into something totally different from the extremist, authoritarian  movement it has become. That might happen some day. It definitely won't happen in two or four or even eight years. And we must be constantly vigilant against the threat that propaganda campaigns pose to our democracy. Too many of our friends and loved ones have already been lost to those propaganda campaigns, but there are so many impressionable young minds out there who could still be swayed in either direction.

Never forget 9/11.

Never forget how the meaning of 9/11 was twisted to help reshape our country for the worse.

Never forget 2020.

Most importantly, never forget what allowed the events of 2020 to happen, and always fight to protect our society from going down this path again.

Wednesday, June 3, 2020

Privileged bubbles and trying to pop them

Recent events in the news:

A Black man jogging through a White neighborhood in Georgia was murdered in a modern day lynching; this happened months ago and the killers would have gotten off scot-free, with help from local authorities, if not for a video being made public.

A Black woman EMT in Louisville was shot and killed in her own home by police officers executing a no-knock warrant at the wrong address.

A White woman called the police and threatened the life of a Black man by falsely claiming that he was threatening her after he asked her to obey the rules and leash her dog in Central Park.

A police officer in Minneapolis murdered a Black man by kneeling on his neck for nine minutes while the victim offered no resistance.

All this in the midst of a global pandemic that here in the United States is both taking advantage of and putting a spotlight on existing systemic inequities as it disproportionately kills people of color.

And now, police are violently cracking down on protesters against racist police violence, just weeks after police exhibited remarkably peaceful restraint when faced with heavily armed White protesters who stormed state government buildings because they were angry they couldn't get haircuts.

Noticing a theme?

My Facebook feed is full of people expressing well justified outrage at these events. I'm not criticizing people for posting hashtags. I'm glad that so many people want to do something to make a difference. But what can we (and by "we" I specifically mean White people) do to actually make a lasting difference? Plenty of awareness has been raised about these issues by now. I'd guess that most everyone who is going to care about the issues already cares about them. People who still don't care, even now, aren't going to start caring because they saw another hashtag.

I'm absolutely not faulting people for posting statuses on Facebook to raise awareness, but that's the easy part. We also have to do things that aren't easy.

In this day and age, with a virulent racist occupying our nation's highest office and with white supremacists emboldened by this fact, it is not enough to be "not racist." (It has never been enough to be just "not racist," but I think that's become far more obvious over the course of the last decade and especially last few years than it was for most of my own lifetime.) We have to be actively anti-racist if we want to do something about the underlying racism that affects everything in our society. What are some things we can do to be actively anti-racist?

I've thought about this a lot in recent years, ever since Ferguson, really. I won't claim to be an expert. But I'd like to share some of my thoughts relating to my own life experiences.

"Who would really have it any other way?"

It's so easy for White people to live in a bubble. I know this very well from my own life. And White people, generally speaking, have no idea what it's like to actually experience racism. But we know that racism is bad, because we've been told that all our lives. And we've been told that racists are bad people. And we don't think that we ourselves, or our close friends and loved ones, are bad people. Therefore we must not be racist and we must not be contributing to the racism that is everywhere in our society.

Being told that something we did or said was racist, or contributed to racism, does not feel good. I know this. It hurts our feelings. But that doesn't mean it's not true. (Nor does it necessarily mean you're a bad person.) We have to stop being so sensitive to our own hurt feelings. We have to stop being such snowflakes. If the worst racism-related thing you can imagine happening to you is being called a racist... imagine what it's like to actually be a victim of racism.

The killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, for me, unavoidably recalls memories of events that demonstrated to me just how hard it is for White people to recognize and confront racist sentiments expressed by people close to them. Floyd was quoted as saying "I can't breathe" while that police officer choked the life out of him with a knee to the neck.

The phrase "I can't breathe" entered the national consciousness after a similar incident almost six years ago when Eric Garner, another unarmed Black man, uttered the same words while the life was choked out of him by an NYPD cop.

A relative of mine wrote an infamous newspaper column about Eric Garner's death. The column began [content warning: extremely inflammatory sentiments about victims of racist police violence]:
Eric Garner and Michael Brown [the victim of the police shooting in Ferguson, Missouri] had much in common, not the least of which was this: On the last day of their lives, they made bad decisions. Epically bad decisions. 
Each broke the law — petty offenses, to be sure, but sufficient to attract the attention of the police. 
And then — tragically, stupidly, fatally, inexplicably — each fought the law. 
The law won, of course, as it almost always does.
On a family email list, an email thread about this column - or more specifically, online reactions to this column - came up. Family members were offended at the insults online commenters were slinging at my relative who wrote those words. Some family members did, yes, express disagreement with the column's sentiments. But no one said anything remotely to the effect of, "hey, that's pretty... racist?"

Another passage in the infamous column was this:
Second, and this speaks to the ubiquitous allegation that cops are treated “differently” than ordinary citizens in deadly-force cases: Indeed they are — and it is the law itself that confers the privilege. 
The law gives cops the benefit of every reasonable doubt in the good-faith performance of their duties — and who would really have it any other way?
I'd say that the overall sentiments in this column are pretty racist, and it would require a pretty narrow definition of what qualifies as "racism" to deny that - but this is something of a semantics issue. It's literally impossible to have lived in society and not have racial biases that affect our thinking, because we're constantly bombarded with messages that implant these biases in our brains. Whether these biases rise to the level of being "racist"? Does it matter that much?

Whether or not it's "racist," that statement - the law itself... confers the privilege... The law gives cops the benefit of every reasonable doubt... and who would really have it any other way? - in light of the things that keep happening to Black people at the hands of law enforcement - over, and over, and over - is probably one of the most blatant examples of being blinded by one's one privilege that I've ever seen. Like, maybe you can't imagine why anyone would really have it any other way... but maybe the people who have to constantly live in fear of what cops might do to them or to their loved ones, maybe they would have it another way?

(Because people's feelings get hurt so much by any hint that they're guilty of racism, other terms have been invented to try to illustrate the same concepts in different ways. Such as "white privilege." "White privilege" is basically just another way of saying that society is racist against non-White people. And it doesn't mean that White people's lives are easy, just that when White people's lives aren't easy, the color of their skin isn't one of the reasons for that. But again, as with "racism," people get their feelings hurt by the term "white privilege." Stop being such fragile snowflakes.)

Although this newspaper column is nearly six years old now, it came up not too long ago on the same family email list, in an unrelated topic, but before all the current craziness (that is, COVID and mass protests) in this country started. And in that recent thread, family members from different parts of the political spectrum all seemed to scoff at the idea that the relative who wrote that column was racist or was even "racially biased."

Because of course. Racists are bad people. My relative, a person I care about, is not a bad person. Ergo, my relative is not racist.

It doesn't really work that way.

I reiterate, it is impossible to live in society and not be racially biased. It is a question of whether we actively work to recognize and confront those biases.

Not unrelated to this line of discussion, the relative in question, in other emails, has also favorably cited the writings of Charles Murray, author of noted work of pseudo-scientific racism The Bell Curve. Specifically, an article was shared that in essence claimed that if different racial groups had equal opportunities in society, that wouldn't necessarily result in the different racial groups having the same outcomes - "the same mean income, the same mean educational attainment, the same proportions who become janitors and who become CEOs."

This is pretty much by definition a racist claim by Murray.

Think about how many times in the average Black person's life they must encounter an Amy Cooper (the Central Park dog leash lady) or a Derek Chauvin (the Minneapolis cop who murdered George Floyd), and that Amy Cooper or that Derek Chauvin has some ability to influence the course of events in that Black person's life - grades they get, job hirings, promotions, criminal charges, etc.

In the real world we inhabit, it is impossible to test Murray's hypothesis that, given equal opportunities, different races would not attain equivalent outcomes, because we are so incredibly far away from equal opportunities.

This all happened a long time ago. But for whatever reason, these incidents just have a way of sticking in my mind forever. Incidents where someone put forth racist ideas and no one in the family stood up and called it what it was. I myself would sometimes try to push back, but I wouldn't go so far as to say, "hey, that's racist."

And perhaps that wouldn't have accomplished anything anyway, because, again, of the whole White people being fragile snowflakes about accusations of racism thing.

But how often do conversations like this happen in White families all over the country, and no one tries to advance the anti-racist narrative, and impressionable people - impressionable children, especially - are watching and listening and having their world views shaped by such statements going unchallenged?

So one not easy thing we have to do is, when someone we know says something racially problematic, we have to be able to point that out, ideally in a way that will encourage others to listen and not just shut down (that part of it is even less easy). Another not easy thing we have to do is, when someone does point out that we have done or said something racially problematic or that we bear some responsibility for the racism that permeates society, we have to get over our hurt feelings and make a good faith effort to listen and learn. White people's feelings are not the important thing right now.

Let me be very clear, this is not just a problem among conservative White people. This is a problem among numerous liberal White people as well. For another example from the dreaded family email list, a fairly liberal family member shared a statement by a fringe group of conservative African-American pastors decrying the Supreme Court's 2013 decision that the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional. The statement was, "We are devastated that the Supreme Court succumbed to political pressure by voting to weaken the sacred institution. They neglected our most precious children who need a mother and a father united in marriage for healthy development."

This liberal family member strongly disagreed with the Black pastors and expressed that they did not even know how to respond without being labeled racist. Basically, they felt that it was hypocritical for a Black person to say this because of the high rate of Black children being raised by single parents.

Obviously I do not agree with the Black pastors' stance on gay marriage. But saying that they're hypocrites because they're Black? Yes, yes that would, in fact, be racist.

And again no one else in the family seemed to have a problem with this.

Again, a long time ago. Again, something that stuck in my mind. That's just the way my brain works.

The point is not to demonize specific people in my extended family, it's to illustrate how pervasive these attitudes are, and how casually accepted they are, even among people who harbor no conscious animosity toward other races and who would absolutely never think of themselves as racist.

I don't want to just call out other people here. I'm not going to pretend I'm immune to this stuff.

Bubbles

I grew up in a total white privilege bubble. In school I learned about the Civil Rights movement and the message that came across was that, although there might still be racist individuals out there, and those individuals were bad for being racist, racism as a structural, societal issue had largely been solved in the 1960s.

I was in such a bubble that I actually believed this to be true until at least several years into my adult life.

(The most ironic part was probably learning about school integration in a classroom that was at least 95% White and no one ever pointing out that disconnect.)

I remember when I was in college, thinking that if affirmative action was used for school admissions, it should be focused only on economic status, not on race, because I thought disadvantages Black students faced in modern society were due to Blacks tending to be poorer as a result of racism in the past, but not because of racism that still existed in the present. And that low income White students were just as disadvantaged as low income Black students.

This seems completely crazy to me now. But when I was in college, I actually believed this.

(And just in case it's not clear - I am not saying that low income Whites face no disadvantages. Just that Blacks, of any income level, face many other obstacles that Whites don't face.)

I also remember making enormous use of "ironic racism" for the purpose of Internet humor when I was in my mid 20s. I thought I was just being absurd because I thought that people generally didn't believe those things anymore, for real, in modern society.

Talk about being in a bubble!

Truth is, I can only think of two Black people who I knew in person over the entire first eighteen years of my life. Both were people I went to school with and got along with but neither was a close friend. I had literally not the slightest comprehension of what it was like to be a Black person in America, because no one ever tried to tell me.

This is a map showing the block-by-block racial demographics of where I lived when I was growing up (from justicemap.org which uses Census data):

Purple indicates Whites are the most common race. The darkest shade of purple indicates greater than 90% White. I lived in one of the purplest of purple regions on this map.

Where I live now looks very different.

On this map, purple again indicates Whites are most common, red indicates Blacks are most common, and the deeper purple or red indicates a larger percentage of that particular race. I live right at a transition point between plurality White and plurality Black. I didn't choose where I live based on the racial demographics, I just happened to find a place I liked in this location.

So here's the thing. When I was younger, if I had been passing through this neighborhood and seen the people who lived here, there would have been a little voice in my head saying, in essence, "A lot of Black people live here so it's probably not a very good neighborhood."

No one in my life ever tried to instill racist values in me. Not remotely. But when you grow up around all White people, and don't really know any Black people, and most of the Black people you see in the media are either pro athletes (who are obviously very rare to encounter in everyday life) or people accused of crimes, that's just what happens to your brain.

(It's also worth pointing out the inherent privilege in these "good neighborhood" assessments. Most White people would see a neighborhood like the one in which Ahmaud Arbery was murdered for jogging while Black as a good neighborhood.)

So as I said before, it's not a question of whether or not someone is racially biased, because it's impossible to live in society and not be racially biased. It's a question of whether you recognize that those biases exist in your brain and then make an effort to actively confront those biases.

I'm not looking for a pat on the back, like "oh what a great guy you are for overcoming your biases." I mean honestly the biases are still there and it's a constant process of confronting them, and it's not easy to do, but it's also not nearly as hard as it must be to be a person who is constantly on the receiving end of those biases. So I think the least I can do as a decent human being is try to recognize and confront those biases and I hope other people can do the same.

School integration (or lack thereof)

If we zoom out from those maps I showed to the metro area level, we see two areas that are both quite segregated, Cleveland (second map below) even more than Columbus.


This is pretty typical of American cities. Why? There's a long, racist, history there that I won't get into (but look into redlining if you aren't familiar with the term).

Oh, one of the upshots of this clustering of Black Americans into inner city areas is that they are exposed to higher levels of pollution (thanks, urban freeways!), which has all sorts of negative health effects on both the brain and body. One of these is higher rates of asthma. Eric Garner's daughter Erica, who became an outspoken activist after her father was killed by the NYPD, tragically died at the age of 27 after an asthma-induced heart attack. Erica Garner was a victim of our racist society just as much as her father. It's also very likely the case that her health conditions were exacerbated by the stress of living in a world full of people making derogatory and deliberately inflammatory statements about her and her deceased father.

That said, I mainly bring up this segregation because it goes to one of the other important but not easy things that my life experiences have convinced me White people need to do.

Everyone wants what's best for their children. A big part of that, society tells all of us, is making sure our children go to a really good school. I have no doubt that most people, when thinking about where they are going to raise their children (a very big decision, to be sure), look up the ratings of the schools that their children would potentially attend.

Ohio school district report cards show that the Grandview Heights school district, where I grew up, gets an A grade. The Cleveland Heights-University Heights school district, where I currently live, gets a D grade.

"I would be a bad parent if I sent my kids to a D-rated school!" a lot of people undoubtedly think.

What those people may or may not know is that these school ratings are largely proxies for the socioeconomic statuses of the students who attend the schools, and do not really tell us anything independent of that about the quality of the schools.

The school funding system in the state of Ohio, where school districts are funded by local property taxes so that wealthier districts have better funded schools, has been declared unconstitutional multiple times going back to 1997, and yet still nothing has been done to fix this problem.

Furthermore, because Black people face numerous structural obstacles at every step of life as a result of living in a deeply racist society, Black students, on average, are more likely to struggle in school. Therefore a majority Black district will tend to get lower ratings regardless of how good the teachers in those schools are.

At Grandview Heights High School, by the most recent report, the student population is 91% White (non-Hispanic). At Cleveland Heights High School, it's 76% Black, 15% White.

This is interesting when compared to the overall demographics of the cities. Grandview Heights is 93% non-Hispanic White. Cleveland Heights is 46% White, 42% Black. The former's school demographics match the city demographics. The latter's are drastically different.

This is because in Cleveland Heights a much larger percentage of students, especially White students, attend private schools.

So the pattern is: White parents who live in a racially diverse area tend to either (a) move to a not diverse suburb (like the one where I grew up) or (b) send their kids to private school (like the schools a lot of White kids in my current city of residence attend), either way so they can ensure their kids go to a high-rated school.

(Cleveland Heights, by the way, is one of the most liberal cities in the entire country. Out-and-out, virulent racists are extremely rare here. So this is definitely an example of what I mean when I say these problems that contribute to a structurally racist society are present among White people of all political stripes.)

"Separate but equal" was ruled unconstitutional in 1954. The Supreme Court correctly ruled that there could not be equality under segregation. Yet today, school segregation in much of this country is almost as bad as ever.

This is definitely one of those things that's not easy, because society bombards parents with messages that they have to make sure their kids have the best possible path to success and they have to make sure their kids go to the best schools and they would be irresponsible parents if they didn't. And one part of solving this is that we have to demand equitable school funding. But I also contend that any time a well-to-do White family living in a racially diverse metropolitan area makes a decision to send their children to largely segregated schools - public or private - that decision contributes, in its own tiny way, to the vast racial divide that is tearing our country apart.

Now this does not mean that White parents who make these decisions are racists or bad people. Okay, some are, but most aren't. They're just doing what society tells them they have to do to be good parents. But as this ongoing pandemic is also illustrating, we have to think beyond our own selfish interests and think more about society at large. Everyone doing what they think is in their own best interests creates a disaster for society.

I expect this is uncomfortable for some people to think about because I know that lots and lots of the people I know come from families who made the decision, or are people who made the decision themselves, to enroll children in largely segregated schools because that's what society told them was what they had to do for their children. But we have to confront this issue. This is part of what I mean by doing things that aren't easy.

And I don't mean that all well-to-do White parents have an absolute moral obligation to send their kids somewhere like Cleveland Heights for school. There are a lot of factors that go into a decision like that. I'm just saying promoting diversity and equity in society should be one of those factors. I'm saying that what we do have an obligation to do, at the very least, is to reject the notion that being a good parent means making sure your kid goes to a "highly rated" school, when we know that those school ratings reflect the socioeconomic statuses of the student bodies and little else.

If I had gone to a school like Cleveland Heights instead of Grandview Heights, would I have any less success in life? I really doubt it. I think my ability to be successful comes a lot more from the resources and nourishing home environment my parents provided me than it comes from what school I attended. (Underprivileged children, of any racial background, would undoubtedly have much more to gain from attending exceptionally well funded schools that someone like me.) I also know that friends of mine who attended Cleveland Heights, both White and Black, seem to have gotten good educations and turned out just fine.

And if I had attended such a school, it would have helped me to not be in such a ridiculous white privilege bubble for the first two-plus decades of my life.

I think everyone benefits from getting to know people from diverse backgrounds, as well as from having adequately funded schools. Right now, poor kids who would have the most to gain from really well funded schools are mostly trapped in underfunded schools with other poor kids, and therefore have neither adequate school funding nor diversity. Rich kids who have far more resources at home and could get by more easily with slightly less well funded schools but would really benefit from more exposure to diversity are often in really well funded but also not diverse schools. Some places like Cleveland Heights do genuinely have a lot of socioeconomic diversity, but I suspect the increasing reliance on school ratings by parents who have the most ability to choose where to send their kids to school is making it harder to maintain that socioeconomic diversity in their student bodies.

I want to again emphasize the point that it's not enough, it's never enough, to be not racist, we have to be anti-racist. Let's imagine that, somehow, tomorrow, suddenly everyone in the whole world stopped having any racist motivations whatsoever, but everything else was the same. Black students would still tend to be in less well funded schools, as a result of our country's racist past. Financially comfortable White parents, taking a totally "race neutral" approach but still following the paradigm that they have to send their kids to the top rated schools, would continue to move to mostly White suburbs and/or send their children to private schools. Black parents, having on average less financial resources because, again, of the effects of past racism, would generally find it much harder to make those same decisions about where to enroll their own children. Despite no one being racist anymore, racial segregation and inequity would continue for generations if not into perpetuity!

That's one of the reasons why we can't, can't ever, settle for just being not racist. We have to do more.

Going forward

With the chaos engulfing our country now as cops nationwide choose to violently crack down on protesters rather than accept the possibility of being held accountable for their actions, and the president encourages that police violence, and an increasingly authoritarian and white nationalist Republican Party seems hellbent on dismantling our democracy, I fear everything I discuss in this post is insignificant next to the urgency of this moment. Things seem to have gotten so much worse even in the time since I began composing these words.

The most important thing for the remainder of this year is ensuring Trump and the complicit Republicans in Congress are removed from power. If that doesn't happen, there's a very real possibility all will be lost.

After that, I hope and pray we will all have the opportunity to come together and rebuild our country into a truly more perfect union. The suggestions I'm making are not quick fixes for anything. They're things we'll have to make a consistent effort on for probably the rest of our lives.

I'm not an expert on these issues. I'm just someone who has thought about them a lot and who is hopefully less naive than he was as a young man who had lived his whole life in a bubble, and who likes sharing his thoughts with the world. I've only touched on aspects of the race issue that I can directly relate to my own life experiences. There are other, exceedingly important, elements, that I haven't explored. Police reform seems like the most pressing issue at this moment and I haven't really touched on it, but this is already a long post. And although the problems with police forces are the most blatant right now, if we want lasting change we need to address so much more than that.

The message that I want all White people to hear and process is this - "racism," "racial bias," call it whatever you want, but it's something we all have in our brains, something that affects how we all view the world, whether or not we want to admit it. We've all been told that racism is bad, so it can be uncomfortable to admit these things about ourselves. But we can't prioritize our own comfort over other people's lives. We have to directly confront these biases both in ourselves and in the people around us.

When someone we consider a friend or loved one says something that illustrates racial bias, we can't just let it slide for the sake of avoiding conflict. I get it. I'm generally a conflict-averse person. One thing I've had to work on in therapy is recognizing that avoiding talking about uncomfortable issues to avoid conflict tends to lead to bigger problems in the long run. This is true for societal issues just as much as for personal issues. Maybe the Trumpists' ongoing looting of our country and everything we took for granted is the price we White people are paying for our failure to directly address these issues for so long.

Of course, vulnerable communities and people of color are paying much worse prices for our failures.

When I was a kid, not only did I not really know any Black people, but the people around me didn't really talk about race in any meaningful sense. It seems like people thought, "Well, MLK said we shouldn't judge people by the color of their skin, so if we just tell everyone to not judge people by the color of their skin, it will all work out. No need for any more in depth or uncomfortable conversations about the many ways MLK's dream isn't being realized in society."

It's obvious now that approach didn't work.

I will strongly credit my parents for raising me with good values, even if those values weren't race-conscious. I learned to recognize the fact that my family was very fortunate, that there were a lot of people in the world who didn't have nearly the same good fortune, and that people who are very fortunate have a responsibility to help people who are less fortunate. I didn't learn that rampant racism in society is one of the reasons some people are much less fortunate, but once I became educated as an adult on these issues, my passion about them naturally grew from the values I'd been instilled with as a child.

We have to recognize now that part of instilling our children with a complete set of good values is teaching them about racial justice. And how to be anti-racist instead of just not racist.

We have to reject widely held beliefs that help perpetuate structural racism even in the absence of active racist intent, such as the commonly held beliefs about schooling that have resulted in segregation getting worse, not better, in certain parts of this country over the last few decades.

And we have to do so many other things. This is nowhere close to being a comprehensive list. My heart hurts at what is happening in this country. Writing this is my little attempt at making a difference. I hope it can make a small difference. I vow to do more in the months and years ahead to try to continue to make those small differences. If we all do something every day to make just a little tiny difference, that can add up to enormous change.

But only if we don't settle for doing the easy things.

Any of us who has been settling for doing just the easy things, we have to recognize that time is over.

We have to do the hard things too if we're going to save our country.

Thursday, May 7, 2020

The other virus

I have a lot of things I want to say right now but it's been hard to find the right words to say them and even harder to figure out how to organize those words. What's going on in this country is absolutely infuriating and heartbreaking. At times I'm feeling like I'm losing my mind. We have passed 70,000 deaths from a deadly pandemic and there's no sign that things will be getting better any time soon and it's such a massive failure because there are things we could do to make it get better and there are a lot of people, including a lot of people in positions of power, who are doing nothing but stand in the way of doing those things that we should be doing. Which leads me to say that although COVID-19 is a deadly virus, there's an even deadlier virus that has been spreading in our society for the last few decades. A virus of insidious propaganda infecting the minds of a significant chunk of our country's population.

But let's first look at where we are with COVID-19 right now. Let's look at the current situation in my home state of Ohio, which is not so different from the current situation in a lot of other states. We are fortunate that we got advance warning and that we took preemptive action to stop a massive surge of cases from happening. Our Republican governor Mike DeWine listened to the Department of Health head he appointed, Amy Acton, a medical doctor who also has a Master's in Public Health, and took the lead nationally in shutting down large events like conventions and sports games before infections and deaths started to mount in the state. On March 23 a stay at home order was issued. So let's see what has happened since then. This is a graph I made using the daily COVID-19 hospitalization numbers reported by the state (obtained from covidtracking.com which aggregates all the states' data). There's a lot of variability in day to day numbers; for example, reported numbers on weekends tend to be lower and then there's a backlog that's made up for with higher numbers during the next week, so the black line is a moving average to better illustrate the underlying trend.





Numbers were steadily climbing. The stay at home order was put in place. Two weeks later the numbers fairly abruptly stopped rising. That time delay is pretty much exactly what we'd expect given what we know about this disease!

When I first looked at this graph early last week, it looked to me like we were on a gradual downward trend, but what it looks like now is that after an initial decline from the peak we've had almost three weeks in which the numbers have been basically flat. Suggesting that the measures we have collectively been taking over the course of the month of April to slow the spread of the disease have been enough to stop the number of infections from further growing - but not enough to make the number of infections decline toward zero.

Now there's a big push from some quarters to reopen society and we in Ohio are already going forward with the beginning stages of a plan to open things up. It's a careful and cautious plan. Some other states such as Georgia are going forward with much rasher reopening plans. But does it make sense to be reopening at all?

I'm not an expert in infectious diseases or public health. I don't know the specific details of how different interventions might affect transmission rate, and even people who do have expertise in these fields are still working furiously to try to better understand these details. But at a broad level there is a pretty simple concept here. The infectious model of disease spread has been known for a long time. If the number of infections is currently stable, and we make interventions that will, in aggregate, increase opportunities for the disease to spread, the number of infections is probably going to go up. We are currently still at a higher case load than we were when the stay at home order was enacted. If we went back to normal life right now, numbers would go up just as surely as they were in March. Even if we went back to something in between the way things are now and the way things were in normal life, numbers would go up, just at a slower rate. And then without further interventions to slow the spread they'd keep going up. And up and up and up. Because that's the way infectious diseases work. They'd keep going up until enough people had been infected to achieve herd immunity, but to get there we would first need an absolutely catastrophic death toll.

(I don't expect the numbers to actually go up and up and up. If they go up enough people will probably back off from reopening. We might have an extended period of alternating gradual inclines and declines. A sort of coronavirus limbo.)

The people of this country have made great sacrifices during this pandemic. Sacrifices to lives and health and economic well-being. We should, as a country, have been using the time bought by those sacrifices to come up with a plan, an evidence-based plan formulated by people with subject matter expertise in relevant fields, to get things under control long term. That basically hasn't happened at all.

Why? How did we get into this situation? What the fuck is going on?

On February 26, Donald Trump infamously said, "Again, when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done."

Even after weeks upon weeks of horrifically rising death tolls, he has persisted in this way of thinking. "I think what happens is it’s going to go away. This is going to go away," he claimed on April 28. Apparently others in the administration have also been putting forward this idea that the virus is just going to go away on its own in the coming months. It's essentially a form of magical thinking. It's ignoring all evidence and ignoring all the advice from experts in epidemiology and public health. I'd say it's even dismissing the idea that there is even such thing as subject matter expertise. Like they really seem to think that their predictions based on no evidence carry just as much weight as the predictions of people who have spent years studying these issues.

Look, it's not like everything scientists say is correct. All sorts of mistakes have been made using science. There's a famous Winston Churcill quote: "Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…" I'd say a similar thing about science: it's the worst method of understanding how the world works, except for all those other methods that been tried from time to time. It's impossible to ever get a perfect understanding of how anything works, but through proper application of the scientific method we can get increasingly less imperfect understandings, and we can do amazing things with those increasingly less imperfect understandings. The advances in human health, in identifying, stopping the spread of, and treating and curing various medical conditions, that science has given us over the last couple of centuries are truly astounding. And there are many other equally astounding achievements. We, as a country, put a man on the moon! Now we're letting this virus bring us to our knees?

Here in Ohio, the Republican governor had the wisdom to listen to Dr. Acton, a subject matter expert, to formulate a strategy to fight this pandemic. The Republican administration in Washington DC is utterly lacking that same wisdom. And even in Ohio, numerous Republican members of the state legislature are now trying to stop Dr. Acton from doing her job, some even going so far as to draw comparisons between Acton (who is Jewish) and Nazi Germany. At the same time, largely right-wing protesters are gathering at state houses and at public officials' residences, and resistance is growing, again largely among those on the right, to evidence-based approaches to containing the pandemic such as social distancing and mask wearing.

A recent Ipsos/Axios poll asked Americans whether they believed the actual number of deaths from COVID-19 was greater than, less than, or about the same as the officially reported number. These were the results:





This is not a question where the answer is a matter of opinion. It's a question where solid evidence exists in support of a correct, factual answer. The following image shows the number of deaths over the course of this year for three states with large COVID-19 outbreaks compared to the number of deaths in an average year, along with the number of officially recorded COVID-19 deaths:


It's impossible to ever know the exact numbers, but the gaps between the orange COVID-19 deaths and the dotted lines on each plot are reasonable approximations of the uncounted COVID-19 deaths. Therefore, the correct answer to the question in the above survey is very likely "more" and is definitely not "less." Notice that a majority of Democrats and a plurality of independents answered "more," whereas a plurality of Republicans gave the objectively wrong answer "less."

Why have questions of objective reality become such partisan issues? Why?

I won't get into the lengthy list of reasons why Trump's response to this crisis has been one of the worst failures of a president in American history, and yet surveys continue to show that a solid 40% of Americans approve of Trump's job performance. Most people I know, even many of those who have voted Republican for much of their lives, are all too aware at this point of how poor Trump's job performance is. Who are these 40% of Americans? What world are they inhabiting?

Sadly, this all goes back to the other virus I alluded to at the beginning of this post. In the 1990s, Fox News and other right-wing media sources began a concerted effort to convince their audiences that all other sources of news were "the liberal media" and could not be trusted. It was a great strategy to improve their profits, and also a great strategy for the very wealthy to get working and middle class voters to continue to vote against their own economic interests. This misinformation virus began to take hold in the '90s but has since grown into something even more insidious. I'm sure many of us have seen someone we know and care about fall under control of this virus over the years. The George W. Bush administration took great advantage of the right wing media machine, but there was a key difference - back then, I think that those in power were taking advantage of their propagandized voters but didn't actually believe themselves in a good deal of the propaganda; today, those in power have themselves become just as propagandized.

Many of today's GOP politicians are people who have spent so much time under the virus's influence that they're no more able to see reality than are their most devoted Fox News viewing voters. Trump himself is a Fox News junkie. Furthermore, many GOP politicians have become so cultish in their belief that it's not the government's job to help disadvantaged people that even if they can see the reality of the situation, they seem to be pathologically incapable of wanting to do the right things: providing sufficient economic relief so that people don't have to choose between their livelihoods and trying to stop the spread of a deadly virus, and mobilizing this country's vast resources in science, medicine, and industry to come up with plans to stop this pandemic in its tracks. As I said before, we went to the moon. We could certainly tackle this challenge if we had the will to do so.

How could a political party that has become so fundamentally opposed to doing things that would benefit any but the wealthiest of their constituents continue to maintain power? There are a lot of factors, but a very big one that can't be ignored is, again, that virus of misinformation. Propaganda is effective.

Let me be clear that there are certainly also moderates and liberals who are living in distorted realities. There are certainly also numerous problems with the Democratic party and with its response to the pandemic. And I think there's a tendency among people in general to not take something like this seriously enough if it hasn't affected them personally. But to try to claim that this problem is not an asymmetric one that is much larger on the right is to deny reality just as much as trying to claim that COVID-19 deaths are being over-reported.

We've been building to a moment like this for a long time. The disinformation virus has infected the minds of enough voters to keep an increasingly plutocratic and amoral GOP in power. The virus has strengthened its hold over those voters' minds to the point where they are increasingly living in a different reality made up of "alternative facts" (to quote Kellyanne Conway's January 2017 defense of the Trump administration's lies about inauguration crowd sizes - a preview, it now seems, of everything that has come since). The virus has infected not only the voters, but the politicians who represent them. With a president now under control of the misinformation virus, whose world view is warped by media sources who are themselves intentionally presenting a warped world view to be more favorable to that president, there is now a vicious feedback cycle at play. Those who are fully under control of this virus are spiraling farther and farther away from reality. And now with all this having been set up over the course of the last three decades, a perfect storm of a crisis hits. For us to tackle this crisis in an ideal manner, it would require that our public servants and the public at large would all buy into evidence-based, expertise-guided solutions. It would not be a simple task. A pandemic like this one is a very rare event. It would take a great commitment of effort and resources. But it could certainly be done.

It's pretty simple if you think about it. With the level of social distancing and other measures we've taken so far, we've gotten the cases to be pretty flat. And we all know that there are plenty of people, both in positions of power and in everyday life, who aren't taking this as seriously as they should. If all those people could just be doing a little better job, cases wouldn't be flat, they'd be declining. And then with the extra time bought by cases declining, we could devote the great resources of our country to building up a massive testing program so that everyone can get tested. And then we could mostly reopen society and keep things under control with a fraction of the current death toll until a vaccine becomes available. This is all very plausible. Other countries are accomplishing it much more successfully than we are. But it looks like the other deadly virus of propaganda and misinformation is preventing us as a country from stopping the deadly virus that causes COVID-19.

One of the worst parts is that, whereas COVID-19 is a crisis that has solutions that are, at least in theory, fairly clear, the crisis of the misinformation virus is one that I don't really have a clue how we're going to solve. Studies have shown that when people strongly believe in something untrue, if you present them with evidence that contradicts their erroneous belief, it tends to just make them believe it more strongly.

Why am I even writing all this? It's not going to change the mind of anyone who disagrees. I guess I hope that it might encourage people who don't disagree but haven't thought about these issues as much to think about them more, to think about what we can all do to overcome this problem. Think about whether there are people in your lives who might have a low-level infection from this misinformation virus and could still be cured. Think also, if you've ever been a Republican voter in the past, about what the party has become, how infected it has become with this horrible disease, and how this isn't just a Trump problem, it's a much bigger problem that we're going to continue to have to deal with long after Trump is gone.

And I'm also writing it because all these thoughts are swirling around in my mind and causing me distress and writing them down and putting them out in the world helps me process and helps me going forward to not have as much of my mental capacity taken up by these distressing thoughts.

Just a little over five years ago now I sat in a hospital room and watched as my wife, at 36 years old, died because her lungs stopped working. I will vividly remember that horrible night for the rest of my life. I don't want other people to suffer that same fate if it can be avoided. There are a lot of people unnecessarily suffering that same fate right now, and the whole experience is made that much worse by the limits on hospital visitations that are required to help contain a deadly pandemic. I work in scientific research because I want to try to discover things that could save people's lives and improve their health and well-being. My motivations for speaking out on and combating misinformation about COVID-19 are the same. It's infuriating and depressing beyond words that so many people all the way up to the president of this country have had their minds so warped that they would brush off all that death and ignore experts' guidance on how to stop it. I don't know what we can do about it but we have to do better.

Monday, September 2, 2019

I always cry at endings


It's a common saying that "there's a first time for everything."

If there's a first time for everything, there's also a last time for everything. And sometimes they happen together.

On Saturday I attended the final show of my friend Amy's indie pop band Heavenly Creatures, at the Grog Shop. Farewell shows are always special. I've been to some really memorable ones over the years, most especially A Northern Chorus and Ohbijou. And Saturday's show was another emotional and memorable occasion.

As this was the last Heavenly Creatures show, my thoughts of course turned to the first Heavenly Creatures show, which I also attended. That show took place in October 2014 at the Euclid Tavern. And that show, as it turned out, was an important "last time" for me.

I had no idea at the time, but it was the last concert that Cara would ever attend with me.

Because going to concerts together was such an important part of our relationship, the last time it ever happened is naturally something that holds special significance to me, even if it was just a little local show. Liz Kelly of The Village Bicycle opened the night with a really nice solo set, and the duo of sisters ShiSho - who I remember Cara particularly enjoying - followed. Heavenly Creatures played last and Cara was getting tired - fatigue brought on by her illness and treatments was a major reason she rarely went to concerts anymore - so she ended up leaving early with our friend Troy driving her home - but she did catch part of Amy's band's debut and we had a good time together.

It's good to be able to cherish the memories of those last times.

Almost a month ago now, I visited Cara's mother Joyce for the last time. I brought with me a box I have full of Cara's artwork, mostly drawings that she made in the last few years of her life, and we looked through it together. We hugged tightly before I left. This too was a last time that I did not expect would be a last time, although perhaps in this case a small part of me wondered if it might.

I recall also my mom telling me about the last time that she saw her father, and how that's a memory she cherishes.

The first Heavenly Creatures show (was it really almost five years ago now?) was an especially big deal for Amy, Heavenly Creatures' frontwoman, lead guitarist, vocalist, and songwriter, because it was the first time she had ever done anything like that. I remember how nervous she seemed on stage. It was really cool to see her grow increasingly comfortable and confident in that role as I caught her shows over the years.


She also created some darn good songs, most notably the very clever and equally catchy "Your Record Collection," a song that's very relatable for a music fan like me.

For the band's final show, Amy did what she called "VH1 Storytelling" in between the songs, talking about the music and about the life events related to that music, which helped make the night extra meaningful. Some of her storytelling touched on the troubled and troubling times in which we live.

Amy had to disband Heavenly Creatures because she has to move because she was laid off from her job at American Greetings. She explained that she wrote the song "The Cheerleaders' Table" in response to a round of layoffs at the company in 2018 - and then she herself fell victim to the same thing a year later. American Greetings, the world's second largest greeting card company behind Hallmark, was founded in the Cleveland area in 1906 and has been part of the local economy for over a century. Last year an investment firm took over majority control, leading to the layoffs. "It's not a Cleveland company anymore," Amy explained. A sad and all too common story of 21st century life.

"Comforting Pain" was another song inspired by current events, in its case the Republican National Convention held in Cleveland in July 2016. The song begins:

The city might kill me
The summer might just kill us all
The temperature is rising
We might not live to see the fall

The Cleveland-hosted RNC was, of course, the infamous event at which Donald Trump received the nomination to be the Republican presidential candidate. "We were afraid the city was going to burn," Amy said while discussing the song's inception, before sardonically adding, "Now the whole country is burning." More like the world? I thought to myself, stories about the Amazon forest fires flashing through my mind.

Amy also mentioned a concert held during the week of the RNC at which her band covered the R.E.M. song "World Leader Pretend," thinking it fitting (in addition to the title, the lyrics mention raising a wall).

I remember that concert well. It took place at the Happy Dog on the west side. I remember driving across town and seeing the big jet plane with the letters TRUMP emblazoned across its side sitting on the tarmac at the lakefront airport. I remember shuddering at the sight. I remember Amy introducing and playing "World Leader Pretend." I remember Liz Kelly of The Village Bicycle exclaiming, "Fuck you, Republicans! Keep your fucking hands off my fucking uterus!" during between-song banter. I remember a business-casual-dressed middle-aged white guy and a boy I assumed was his son entering the venue some time later to grab a late dinner, looking rather out of place, and me thinking they'd probably come from the RNC and wishing they'd arrived in time to hear that profane outburst. I remember the singer from UK band Jesus and His Judgemental Father talking about how this was their first time in the States and how there were unsettling political events happening on both sides of the Atlantic, but also about how much they'd enjoyed their time over here and (quite charmingly) how they'd enjoyed seeing both fireflies and chipmunks for the first time ever.

It occurred to me while I was thinking about this that there's something interesting about the way I remember concerts. As I look back over all the days of my life, even of my adult life, for a large majority of the days I have no concrete memories of that specific day. Most of the days on which nothing really exceptional happened just run together. I'm sure this is true for most people. If you picked out a random day from my past, chances are I'd have no concrete memories from that day. But concerts... for most concerts I've attended, I do have some concrete memory of the event. I can picture myself at that specific concert. Perhaps I can recall something about a particular song or something that someone in the band said. And so concerts are in some sense anchor points in my recollection of the history of my life. (I think an interesting sci-fi thriller novel I just read called Recursion by Blake Crouch probably helped spark these ponderings.)

I wonder if other people have noticed this sort of thing. Of course, important life events such as a first date, a wedding, the death of a loved one, etc. are more prominent anchor points that are sure to have very concrete memories attached, and there are all sorts of other occurrences that could result in clear memories, but for me, I think concerts are the most common anchor points. Especially in the years since I had to give up distance running, as races in particular as well as certain particularly memorable training runs were another common form of anchor point in my memories. What sorts of commonly occurring anchor points do other people have?

Returning to the events of this past Saturday night...

The Heavenly Creatures song "Who Knows (Goodbye)" concludes with my friend Leia, formerly of the delightfully twee band Afternoon Naps, chiming in to sing the word, "Goodbye." Leia and her husband Martin were original members of Heavenly Creatures and were part of the lineup at that very first show in 2014 but did not stay in the band very long. At the farewell show, during the performance of "Who Knows," Leia was sitting next to the stage. As the song neared its conclusion, she edged her way onto the stage and in front of a microphone to add her part to the song - which was very cute, I must say. That "Goodbye," of course, took on extra significance this time. Leia and Martin then joined the band for the rest of the set.

The last few songs were cover songs chosen specifically for the occasion. Amy said that she had had an idea for years to form an all-female Radiohead cover band called Ladiohead. A similar idea, she added, was an R.E.M. cover band called R.E.Femme. (As an enjoyer of really cheesy puns and wordplay, I greatly appreciated these.) Although the performers were not all female, Amy and her band delivered an impassioned cover of Radiohead hit "Creep."

The next song was introduced by Amy as having been the first song she ever performed on stage, and she said that at the time, she'd had no idea the meaning it would one day have. The song? "Get Me Away From Here, I'm Dying," a classic Belle and Sebastian tune. With lyrics "At the final moment, I cried/I always cry at endings," it's very fitting for a farewell show.

For me the song is strongly tied to another memory. Me seeing Belle and Sebastian at Red Rocks in June 2015, a show Cara had been supposed to go to with me, and witnessing a live performance of that song, and being struck by how the title lyrics "Get Me Away From Here, I'm Dying" were so similar to Cara's last words, which as I recall them were along the lines of: "I'm dying. I'm dying. Get me out of here."

And I know that sounds like it must be a really horrible thing to remember. I think what the last moments of a life are actually like is something a lot of people don't like to talk about. But it was something that really happened, something really significant in my life, a moment I shared with Cara - and with her mother - and I wouldn't want to forget it.

The last song of the last Heavenly Creatures show was another one very fitting for the moment, "It's the End of the World as We Know It (And I Feel Fine)" by R.E.M. As the audience belted out the familiar chorus, it was simultaneously poignant and exhilarating. It was a night to remember for sure.

So thank you, Amy and Heavenly Creatures, for the music and the memories. I think everyone who creates music and bravely puts a piece of themselves out there into the world is doing a little something to help us all make it through this strange and often distressing reality, and for that I'm very grateful.

Tuesday, April 30, 2019

Andrew Bird's Finest Work Yet

The release of a new album by Andrew Bird is something I have no doubt will always bring me mixed emotions.

Andrew Bird was Cara's favorite musician. Although I was listening to his music before she was, he became, of all the musicians we both loved, the one who was hers. Pretty much all the others we either liked about equally well, or I was more into than Cara was. Andrew Bird, to me, was an artist I really appreciated, especially his live performances, but he wasn't in my very top tier of favorites. Cara, on the other hand, developed something of an obsession. (I just loved the passion she had for his music, and how excited she would get about it! On a related note, I always enjoy revisiting her review of his April 2009 Cleveland show.)

So whenever Andrew Bird releases new music, I feel a deep sense of sadness that Cara is not here to experience that music. I want to listen to it with her, and talk about it with her, and most of all, to take in another of his unforgettable live performances with her. And it's not even just about wanting to do those things with her. I also just want Cara herself to be able to listen to Bird's new music because I know how much joy it would bring her. (But maybe, somewhere, she can hear it?) I think, honestly, that there are very few things in life that make me miss Cara more than listening to a new Andrew Bird album or attending one of his shows.

At the same time I feel that sadness, I also feel happy that I'm here to experience his music and that it is and always will be something that helps tie me to Cara.


Last month Bird released the cheekily titled My Finest Work Yet.

(A couple of months before the album release, a YouTube video with the audio of opening track "Sisyphus" was put online, and the first part of the video featured a series of laudatory quotes flashing onto the screen:

"MESMERIZING" - Andrew Bird, singer-songwriter

"SEARING" - Andrew Bird, singer-songwriter

"DESERVING OF ITS OWN STREAMING PLATFORM" - Andrew Bird, singer-songwriter

"ICONIC" - Andrew Bird, singer-songwriter

"BIRD AT HIS BEST" - Andrew Bird, singer-songwriter

"YES" - Andrew Bird, singer-songwriter

"JUST WOW" - Andrew Bird, singer-songwriter

"A SWASH-BUCKLING ROMP" - Andrew Bird, singer-songwriter

"I THINK 'MY FINEST WORK YET' IS MY FINEST WORK YET" - Andrew Bird, singer-songwriter

I enjoyed this far too much. Also, the video proper for "Sisyphus" includes Bird on a bicycle. Cara would have loved it!)

After giving the album a good number of listens, remarkably, I think there may be merit to the claim that it (Bird's twelfth solo studio album) is his finest work yet.

When you listen to a new Andrew Bird album, to some extent you have a good idea of what you're getting into. The exceptionally talented singer-songwriter has developed a sound that is very much his own, a brand of indie folk/rock that is highlighted by his violin playing, his remarkable talent for whistling, and his distinctive vocals and lyrics. Each album tends to have its own sound, but the sounds of most of the albums occupy the same general musical space. My Finest Work Yet is no different, but there's something about this one that feels like Bird has just taken all the elements that made his previous music so good and melded them together in a really sublime way. Also, I felt that some of Bird's previous albums could have used a little editing; they perhaps ran a little long (2012's Break It Yourself in particular). His most recent full-length before MFWY, 2016's Are You Serious, on the other hand, I felt suffered from too many of the songs being relatively short in length; the music didn't have enough space to breathe. His latest threads the needle perfectly with ten songs that all feel essential to the album, and each song is given the space it needs - the contemplative, six-and-a-half minute "Bloodless" is an especial highlight.

There is one way that MFWY actually is a significant departure in sound from all of Bird's previous albums, and that's in the prominent role of a piano in most of the songs on the album. But here's the thing - until I read the interview with Bird that is included in the liner notes, it didn't even occur to me that it was unusual for his music to have much piano. That's how naturally it's integrated into his style. The piano helps give a jazzy feel to a number of the tracks and it really suits Bird so well.

Putting an interview with the artist in the liner notes of an album is unusual, but I think it was a really good idea. The interview gave me a lot of interesting insight into Bird's mindset and process of making the album. I learned, for example, that the album was recorded live: "live vocals, no headphones, no separation. We were trying to get all the instruments to bleed into each other's mics in a pleasing way as opposed to a messy way." Like the interviewer (author Dave Eggers, who went to high school with Bird), I would never have guessed it was all recorded live, but now that I know that, I can picture it while listening to the album and I can see how it could have helped give the album the very pleasing sound it has.

I also liked Bird's discussion of writing a song and picturing playing that song live, including potentially playing it live many years in the future: "There's one song I've been doing for 16 or 17 years now, almost every show. It's called "Why," and it's a conversation between two people - an argument, if you will - and in it, I'm mostly playing the role of the other person in the relationship that I find myself in, a person that's frustrated with my passiveness. So, in the whole song, I'm getting mad at myself, and I'm playing myself as well. It's mostly the voice of the pissed off person that's like, "Why don't you show more passion? Why don't you get mad?" And I get really mad, every night, and it never fails. I don't think I've ever written a song where I get so much satisfaction over berating myself, or my former self."

Cara loved "Why." It was one of her favorite songs. I remember the first time we saw him together, twelve years ago, and how mesmerized she was at that song, a song that I'm pretty sure she at the time had never previously heard. I'm also amused by Bird's description because I remember that Cara would sometimes get frustrated with my passiveness.

My Finest Work Yet is a very political album, a description that applies to no previous Andrew Bird album. Bird's lyrics still have his usual whimsical style, but unmistakable references to current events populate the album. "Bloodless" laments that "The best have lost their convictions/While the worst keep sharpening their claws/Peddling in their dark fictions/While what's left of us we just hem and we haw." "Fallorun" much more directly references Donald Trump (although not by name): "You think it's just an aberration/That it could not happen here/Such an abomination/Could be the man of the year."

The message of "Archipelago," I think, is especially worth pondering: "We're locked in a death grip and it's taking its toll/When our enemies are what make us whole." More and more in today's society it seems like people are becoming defined by who and what they hate. Trumpism and to a certain extent the modern conservative movement as a whole are a grievance movement - its main reason for existence seems to be exacting punishment and revenge on those (people of color, feminists, LGBT people, immigrants, Muslims, etc.) who members of the movement see as enemies. Their enemies are what make them whole. And while I can't stand both-sides-ism and would never suggest that people who vigorously and vehemently oppose Trump are equivalent to people who support Trump, I think many liberals are also allowing themselves to become defined by their enemies in an unhealthy way. Someone who watches MSNBC all day won't be divorced from reality in the way that someone who watches Fox News all day will, but both people will be spending a huge amount of time having their minds filled with things to be angry about, and I don't think that's healthy.

These topics are touched on in the interview as well. "I'm interested in the idea that our enemies are what make us whole," Bird remarks. "That's what I'm trying to look at. And how we've gotten to this point and how we could, through awareness of it, maybe pull ourselves out of it." That's something we should all consider, I'd say.

I think about sharing this album with Cara and I think about the fact that to explain the album to her I'd have to explain to her the fact that Donald Trump is the president and a burgeoning neo-fascist movement is threatening our democracy and it's all still so surreal. Cara passed away almost two months before Trump announced his candidacy, so the idea of Trump as president was something she never had to hold as one of her concerns or worries. Sometimes a part of me thinks sardonically that she was lucky to escape this bizarre and distressing reality we now inhabit.

It is a very sad thing that we live in a time that causes someone like Andrew Bird to feel compelled to directly address politics in his music. But it's also a very good thing that we have that music to help us reckon with and get through this time.

I really like the the last exchange in the Eggers/Bird conversation so I'll close by sharing it:

DE: Do you find that your audiences are hungrier for some sort of communal feeling during times like this? I can't imagine anything more cathartic or healing than to play music to hundreds of people - that energy in a room, I would think, is rebalancing.

AB: Playing live and meeting folks after the shows does more to set my mind right and reinforce my faith in humanity than anything else I could possibly do. Get off your news feed and gather in a dark room with strangers for something that doesn't involve acrimony. It's that simple.