September 2020

Dear Friends & Family

We need to talk

For the last 10 years I haven’t discussed politics or
beliefs with you, as I realize these discussions can be
difficult. Maybe I should have spoken up earlier? I
would have rather had a discussion around the
campfire or kitchen table in the past months but the
border is closed and I don’t know when we will have
the opportunity to pick this up in person. I hope this will
re-open a conversation, which can take place now
while we are physically distant but also when we are
able to be together. As I expect you are, I am troubled
by the current state of American politics. I care about
you and your country, we are family and our
similarities are greater than our differences. Rational
and thoughtful discourse is a foundation of our
democratic societies and is how we can overcome the
division or percieved division that is present today.
The issues in this letter are personal to me, less than
eighty years ago in Europe facists were systematically
murdering millions of Jews, including, members of my
family. My grandfather was fortunate to survive but had
to change our family name, had his law licence
revoked, and fled his home country of Austria just
because of his race, he was a Jew. He fought facism
by helping others esape Austria, and then joined the
British Special Operations Executive to fight alongside
Americans and others liberating Europe from Facism.
Millions of lives were lost in World War II because of the
false and destructive ideas of Facism. I have always
been intrigued and troubled by how facism could lead
average German and Italian citicizens to blindly follow
the racist and destructive policies of Hitler and
Mussolini. If enough citizens resisted by using logical
reasoning, conversation, and action - I wonder how
much violence could have been avoided? I believe in
the power of reason to arrive at true beliefs and that
those beliefs are not based on hatred and division but
love and respect for others. I’m not calling anyone
“facist”. Facism is a social and political movement which
aims to
divide a
population in
order for a
strong leader
to take over
and demand absolute loyalty. In this letter, I will define
facism; provide examples of facism from history and
present day; show why it hurts us all; and give ideas of
how we can stop it. Please read this letter, think about it,
and feel free to respond with your own thoughts in DM,
email to jerdbryant@gmail.com, or give me a call
604-788-8548. I propose 4 ground rules for reading this
letter and thinking about beliefs and politics:

Baruch Spinoza Socrates Aristotle Søren Kierkegaard

1) Limit your 2)Think CRITICALLY 3) Avoid Logical 4) ACT consistently

EMOTIONS.
Emotions are not inherently
bad but can cloud reasoning.
If you find yourself too mad
or upset to read this put it
down for a while.
about what you believe and
what I believe. Where are
we making assumptions,
engaging in poor
reasoning, or appealing to
unreliable sources of
information.
FALLACIES.
When thinking critically and
forming your own
arguments or engaging
with others, recognize and
avoid common logical
fallacies. Guide on page 4.
with your beliefs. Even
if they are unpopular in
your family, church,
community, or country.
Popular beliefs are not
always based on reason or
truth.
 The word “facism” is often used as an epithet to chastise politics we strongly disagree with.
Such use ignores the reality of facism as a historical social and political movement.
Experts recognize that facism contains consistent elements through history, I will focus on three:
1) the mythic past, 2) sowing division, 3) an attack on truth.

Re-imagining facism as a social and political ideology can help us recognize it as a series of false
beliefs as opposed to a strict comparator between a political movement today and Nazism.

The Mythic Past

In Facist Italy, Musolini used the Roman empire as a symbol
of Italy’s military strength; in Turkey today, Erdoğan alludes to
the greatness of the Ottoman Empire; in America Donald
Trump promises to “Make America Great Again”.
The mythic past conjours a golden era which the leader alone
can return the people to (as Trump put it “I alone can fix it. I
will restore law and order”, at the RNC in 2016). The question
is when, who, and why. When should America return to?
Yes, there have been great moments in American history but
ask would the nation want to return to the slavery of the
Antebellum South in the nineteenth century or the tragic wars
of the twentieth century? The great moments in American
history were when Americans worked together to overcome
these and other divisions. Whether America was “great" has
always depended on who you were (race and economic
circumstances). The relatively greatness of the past also
depended on why it was “great” at that time. Using the 1950s
as an example, if you were a white American living in the mid-
west and working in manufacturing, you may have benefited
from increased wealth in the middle class enabled by the post
war economic boom supported by direct government
intervention in the economy intended to benefit working class
Americans. However, if you were poor and Black living in the
Jim Crowe South, not only were you excluded from full
participation in economic and social life due to segregation but
your health was precarious as you could be lynched by racist
groups such as the Ku Klux Klan.
We have the benefit of having learned from the past. No era
was perfect. We should ask whether what we do/believe today
will put us on the right side of history. After all, well intentioned
people (Christians) supported slavery, segregation, and
Naziism. Rather than returning to a mythical past, a better
approach would be to vote for leaders and (more importantly)
work together ourselves to make America Great (period) today,
both for ourselves and those excluded in the past.
Are you ANTIFA? ANTI-FA literally means anti-facist. It has
historical roots in Europe and America as a response to the
social and political movements of facism. Today, there are a
few ANTIFA organizations, but there is no central-
organization or leadership and it is not a threat to you or
America. If you believe otherwise, consider whether you are
relying on false information (see guide on page 3).
I suggest, you can take 3 positions towards facism: 1) you are
anti-facism (ANITFA) 2) you are neutral with regards to facism
3) you are opposed to anti-facism (you are facist). I
acknowledge there are more nuanced approaches and
understandings of/to facism. For example, you could be
against facism but also against violent anti-facism. That is
my approach in this letter. I would still fall under position 1
as I am anti-facism. If you are actively opposed to anti-
facism (ie. the Trump administration labelling ANTIFA a
terrorist organization) but take no position with regards to
facism (ie. white nationalists and the alt-right), it becomes
much harder to claim you are neutral under position 2. To
be clear, I strongly believe that we should all be anti-
facism (ANTIFA).

Sowing Division
Facism uses division and fear as a wedge to divide We recognized the suffering of the Syrian people and
people and entrench power. The focus of these
divisions is race, political differences, and religion.
Nazis blamed the Jews and Communists for corrupting
their pure German race and society. In India today,
Hindu Nationalists blame the minority Muslim
population for their problems. In his campaign and
throughout his presidency, Trump has similarly sown
division. He entered the political limelight by creating
false rumours that President Obama was a non-citizen
and Muslim (race and religion). He has placed blame
on non-white immigrants (race); liberals (political
differences), and muslims (religion and race). Division
by race: When faced with the Syrian refugee crisis the
Trump administration introduced the “Muslim ban”
citing fear of terrorism so refugees could not flee to
America. Meanwhile in Canada, citizens mobilized
(including our church) with the support of the Canadian
Government to welcome Syrian refugees, with
precautions but not fear.
* learning the definition of facism.
their intrinsic value as human beings, regardless of
racial and religious differences. Trump has called
countries “shitholes”; suggested many Mexican
immigrants are rapists and gangsters; and called the
Coronavirus, the “kung-flu”. Dehumanizing those
different than us normalizes and encourages: family
separation policies which leave children alone in cages
at the Southern border; inaction, disinterest, and denial
when unarmed Black Americans are killed at a
disproportionately higher number than whites by police;
and armed militia confronting protestors seeking racial
justice. Division by political beliefs: Trump has
called peaceful protestors “terrorists” while
sending Federal law enforcement to violently
intervene. During his Fourth of July speech at Mt.
Rushmore Trump warned of “far-left facism”,
projecting the darkest aspects of his own
movement on his political opponents without any
basis in logic or reason, as should be clear after
Division by religion: Historically, whether through the Spanish Inquisition by Christians or the imposition of Sharia Law by Muslims,
imposing religion through the State is problematic. That is why America’s First Amendment is so important. It protects freedom of
religion and the separation of Church and State, equally protecting all religions. The seperation
of Church and State should not be confused with an attack on Christianity. Politicians and religious
leaders use fear of an attack on Christianity to gain power without any logical basis. For
example, Trump recently said the Democratic ticket would “hurt God” and Franklin Graham
posts weekly about the danger to American Christians from different beliefs. This is not a new
strategy. In 2012, James Dobson of Focus on the Family wrote a fictional “letter from Obama’s
America” in which he similarly preyed on some Christians’ fears, suggesting voting for Obama would
result in terrorist attacks in American cities, pornography pushed in front of children, inner-city crime
gone wild because of lack of gun ownership, home schooling banned, Christian publishers forced out
of business, Israel nuked, power blackouts because of environmental restrictions, brave Christian
resisters jailed by a liberal Supreme court, and Christian families emigrating to Australia and New
Zealand etc.. Christianity is not under attack. Also, many Christians do not support Trump or the
Republican Party. Thus State protection is only being urged for one interpetation of scripture and Christian values. All of these divisions
are manufactured to entrench power and not based in objective reality. They are hurting us all. Sowing division has increased hate and
emboldened openly facists groups like white natiolists and the alt-right. Hate crimes have increased. Some claim America is moving
towards civil war. Why? These false divisions must be rejected! In a recent Facebook exchange, I was asked whether my relationship
with my American family was “precarious” because of my differeny beliefs. I was encouraged by your responses which rejected that
notion. The open exchange of ideas is a foundation of freedom and democracy which must be defended by rejecting the sowing of
division whether based on race, political belief, religion or other differences.

Attacking Truth
The media serves an important function sustaining
democracy as it protects the people by independantly
reporting on political corruption and oppression of minority
groups - allowing dissenting voices to be heard. False
information or “fake news” undermines truth and democracy. The proper approach to take is that of an intelligent skeptic.
It is not harmful to start from a place of skepticism of what you
Under facist and totalitarian regimes, the free press is targeted. are told. If you have a hypothesis that is different from what is
However, that does not always come in the form of censorship. reported or understood:
In Fascist Italy, Mussolini's regime undermined the
independent media by questioning all “truth”. In Iris Origo’s A 1) consider the evidence. If you believe the world is flat or
Chill in the Air, An Italian War Diary, 1939-1940, she notes the masks don’t slow the spread of Coronavirus, what proof
facists unceasing radio propaganda cancelled the effect of all exists?
news to the point one man said “the radio has made fools of us
all”. In today’s America, the Trump administration has 2) Place the burden of proving the alternate hypothesis on
relentlessly accused the press of “fake news” while constantly yourself as a challenger to the status quo and not on the
spreading or implicitly accepting false information itself. upholders of the established hypotheses.

Social Media exacerbates the spread of false information as it
is designed to engage us to like and share catchy headlines
aiming to keep us online to gain advertising revenue regardless
of the truth of the information we are viewing. If there is ‘no
truth’, users can believe or disbelieve anything they read.
The belief in ‘no truth’ is false and harmful. There is truth and
that truth is essential to combat totalitarianism and facism.
Much of what you read in the media is true. However, not
everything is. Some useful tips to recognize false information
include: checking the publisher's credibility and what sources
and citations are used in their story; asking if the piece is
opinion or fact; using logical reasoning tools to determine
whether the author is properly interpreting the facts, looking at
things like timing and quality of analysis.
3) Have courage to accept when you are wrong rather than
letting your wishes be the basis for your perceived reality. Just
because you don’t want to follow stay at home orders which
are in place around the World, does not mean the Democratic
party has exagerated the Coronavirus to make Donald Trump
look bad. Do not fall into the trap of confirmation bias, for
example, believing a story that is removed from Social Media
for containing false information confirms your belief in a cover
up of truth.

Whether you want something to be true or whether it supports
your pre-conciveved belief about an event or the world has no
bearing on the truth of the information.
As a correlation to false information, conspiracy theories which
attempt to explain events in the world have also
increased. Events like the Coronavirus pandemic can make it
difficult to figure out what to believe because we feel uncertain,
anxious, and fearful about the state of the world.
4) Have basic trust in people and take things at face value,
there is more often than not, no hidden sinister agenda at play.
Using this approach is freeing because it enables you to: let
go of anger and frustration at the perceived conspirators; to
graciously object to the false beliefs of others as well as your
own; and to accept the limits to what is known/knowable at a
point in time about uncertain events like the Coronavirus.
 Recognizing Common
Either/or: This is a conclusion that oversimplifies the argument by
reducing it to only two sides or choices. Example:

Logical Falacies
We can either stop using cars or destroy the earth.

Fallacies are common errors in reasoning that undermine the logic of
arguments. Fallacies can be either illegitimate arguments or irrelevant points,
and are often identified because they lack evidence that supports their claim.
Avoid these common fallacies in your own arguments and watch for them in
the arguments of others as another way to combat false information.
I have summarized some of common logical falacies but read more about
them: https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/academic_writing/
logic_in_argumentative_writing/fallacies.html
Slippery Slope: This is a conclusion based on the premise that if A happens,
then eventually through a series of small steps, through B, C,..., X, Y, Z will
happen, too, basically equating A and Z. So, if we don't want Z to occur, A
must not be allowed to occur either. Example:
If we ban Hummers because they are bad for the environment eventually the
government will ban all cars, so we should not ban Hummers.
In this example, the author is equating banning Hummers with banning all
cars, which is not the same thing.
In this example, the two choices are presented as the only options,
yet the author ignores a range of choices in between such as
developing cleaner technology, car-sharing systems for necessities
and emergencies, or better community planning to discourage daily
driving.
Ad hominem: This is an attack on the character of a person rather
than his or her opinions or arguments. Example:
Green Peace's strategies aren't effective because they are all dirty,
lazy hippies.
In this example, the author doesn't even name particular strategies
Green Peace has suggested, much less evaluate those strategies
on their merits. Instead, the author attacks the characters of the
individuals in the group.
Ad populum/Bandwagon Appeal: This is an appeal that presents
what most people, or a group of people think, in order to persuade
one to think the same way. Getting on the bandwagon is one such
instance of an ad populum appeal.

Hasty Generalization: This is a conclusion based on insufficient or biased Example:

evidence. In other words, you are rushing to a conclusion before you have all
the relevant facts. Example: If you were a true American you would support the rights of people
Even though it's only the first day, I can tell this is going to be a boring course. to choose whatever vehicle they want.

In this example, the author is basing his evaluation of the entire course on only
the first day, which is notoriously boring and full of housekeeping tasks for
most courses. To make a fair and reasonable evaluation the author must
attend not one but several classes, and possibly even examine the textbook,
talk to the professor, or talk to others who have previously finished the course
in order to have sufficient evidence to base a conclusion on.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc: This is a conclusion that assumes that if 'A'
occurred after 'B' then 'B' must have caused 'A.' Example:
I drank bottled water and now I am sick, so the water must have made me
sick.
In this example, the author assumes that if one event chronologically follows
another the first event must have caused the second. But the illness could
have been caused by the burrito the night before, a flu bug that had been
working on the body for days, or a chemical spill across campus. There is no
reason, without more evidence, to assume the water caused the person to be
sick.
Genetic Fallacy: This conclusion is based on an argument that the origins of
a person, idea, institute, or theory determine its character, nature, or worth.
Example:
In this example, the author equates being a "true American," a
concept that people want to be associated with, particularly in a time
of war, with allowing people to buy any vehicle they want even
though there is no inherent connection between the two.
Red Herring: This is a diversionary tactic that avoids the key issues,
often by avoiding opposing arguments rather than addressing them.
Example:
The level of mercury in seafood may be unsafe, but what will fishers
do to support their families?
In this example, the author switches the discussion away from the
safety of the food and talks instead about an economic issue, the
livelihood of those catching fish. While one issue may affect the
other it does not mean we should ignore possible safety issues
because of possible economic consequences to a few individuals.
Straw Man: This move oversimplifies an opponent's viewpoint and
then attacks that hollow argument.
People who don't support the proposed state minimum wage
increase hate the poor.

The Volkswagen Beetle is an evil car because it was originally designed by
Hitler's army.
In this example the author is equating the character of a car with the character
of the people who built the car. However, the two are not inherently related.
In this example, the author attributes the worst possible motive to an
opponent's position. In reality, however, the opposition probably has
more complex and sympathetic arguments to support their point. By
not addressing those arguments, the author is not treating the
opposition with respect or refuting their position.

Act consistently with your beliefs.

Regardless of what we believe, it is our actions that reflect our morality. If we examine our beliefs and find
some are false and harmful, we are morally obligated to change our corresponding actions. If you choose to
vote for Trump, which I urge against, know that is a moral action and ensure it is consistent with your
beliefs. Regardless of how you vote, or the outcome of the election, resist facism in America, avoid
conspiracy theories, do not fall into hate, act out of love, and strive to make America great for everyone.

I look forward to continuing this dicussion and seeing you soon.

Love a concerned family member, friend, and neighbour (spelled the Canadian way),

Jeremy