3 ms·
<< What do you think led to Trump's government? It is an interesting question and we may be actually getting to a more interesting piece of this conversation (
by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 1y ago
<< What do you think led to Trump's government?
It is an interesting question and we may be actually getting to a more interesting piece of this conversation ( I was mildly concerned we will not be able to get there ). I think opportunity met an opportunist, but that may be tad too glib. Allow me to elaborate as it partially builds on what you wrote.
Way back when I remember going on a mini vacation driving through some states, which included Ohio, West Virginia and few others. I think that was before Trump was elected the first time, but just after Vance started to promote his memoir on just about every show ( not a bad read, I might add ). I had good time overall despite seeing some of the things Vance talked about on that road trip. Probably the saddest thing I saw was a sign saying 'save us Trump'. Chappelle picked up on that too in one of his bits, but I digress.
Why do I mention it? After first Trump win, all the networks tried to do attempt some soul searching with added bonus of melodramatic hand wringing ( whether it was sincere or theater, I leave up to you to interpret ) on how could this have happened, and, amusingly, Vance actually said the why with a simple 'can you hear us now?'. That was obviously in ancient times when CNN thought Vance was a good guy and therefore could be allowed to make such brazen statements.
My subtle point is that folks were already desperate then. The discontent is not discontent anymore. It likely borders on barely contained anger since, to your point, policies did not change much despite, seemingly, party colors changing at the White House.
<< Cancel culture? Don't be ridiculous.
Having wrote all of the above, I can give you that 'cancel culture' as you chose to frame it was not a sole reason for that anger, but I think you severely underestimate the very human need for a safety valve. Hell, systems' need for a safety valve. Believe it or not, soviet communists understood that fairly well. It is possible it was just one more thing that pushed some over the edge.
<< I feel like you are victim blaming here.
I will be mildly blunt. I don't really care how you feel. For every action, there is a reaction. In that sense, human interactions are practically newtonian. I get that you may be sad that I told you your very own actions and stances may be the culprit for the issues you rail against now, but the sooner you recognize this, the sooner you can make reasonable adjustments. Or not.
<< ICE makes use of new tools that were created under the current administration. They make no use of prior laws that may have been diverted from their original purposes.
I have three questions for you. And? So? What? Every single power center is pushing in their own direction for their own benefit using every tool at their disposal. None of this is new. Narrow facts may be different, but the basic principle remains the same. And you focus on what? Theater.
<< I think you mean something like "they go low, we go high", which is a terrible idea in my experience.
You might not be wrong here. However, I would like you to entertain the alternative, because I am not sure you did that in any kind of serious way. "They go low, we go high" at its core is adherence to the existing standard, which is basically what the society is built around. If you tell me that standard is degrading. Maybe the degradation does not quite make it null and void, but it further erodes existing standards eventually leading to societal collapse and a vacuum and I hope that you do understand that humans are not exactly great in a vacuum.
If you see me arguing for status quo, this is exactly the reason.
- thrance 1y agoIf I understand you well, you seem to believe that Trump's government is a reaction to the democrats going too... what? Too woke? Too progressive? IMO, this is an extremely shallow understanding of politics and ignores the material forces that led to someone like Trump getting into power. You can't look at the US in a vacuum. What is happening here has happened dozens of times elsewhere. Was Orban elected because the opposition was too woke? Was Mussolini elected because the opposition was too progressive? Of course not. Trump voters have a really warped perception of the democrats, thanks to decades of well-funded propaganda. They believe the neoliberal party that holds mildy rainbow-capitalist social views is actually a "degenerate trans gang" out to trans their kids or whatever. In truth, the democrats are socially very mild compared to actually progressive parties around the world. Blaming their mild social policies instead of the massive campaigns of disinformation that made them pass for extremists is ludicrous. Here: I'll posit that if the democrats actually fixed the country through more corporate taxes, socialized universal healthcare, free university and such, we'd have heard none of Trump. Without them ever needing to abandon their social policies. But they did not, as they too rely on corporate donors and are too afraid to lose their support by addressing the actual issues this country faces: growing inequalities, etc. > After first Trump win, all the networks tried to do attempt some soul searching with added bonus of melodramatic hand wringing ( whether it was sincere or theater, I leave up to you to interpret ) on how could this have happened Yes, liberal media is condemned to be forever clueless, as they can't reason about the prevalence of money in US politics, and couldn't foresee the very obvious consequences of the wealthy channeling hundreds of billions of dollars toward promoting right-wing populism. > You might not be wrong here. However, I would like you to entertain the alternative, because I am not sure you did that in any kind of serious way. "They go low, we go high" at its core is adherence to the existing standard, which is basically what the society is built around. If you tell me that standard is degrading. Maybe the degradation does not quite make it null and void, but it further erodes existing standards eventually leading to societal collapse and a vacuum and I hope that you do understand that humans are not exactly great in a vacuum. For better or worse, I believe the only solution is for an hypothetical economically progressive party to "play dirty", that is to say employ a form of "left-wing populism". Bernie has been kind of successful in his "oligarchy tour", redirecting the anger of Americans from minorites and unto the billionaires, which largely contribute to this country's actual issues for one. There is no fixing this mess through an appeal to "centrism" or "status quo".