Watching footage of the Loser Sturm overrunning the Capitol during the Beer Belly Putsch, I am struck again by how much of what plagues us is an addiction to the narcissistic idea that everyone is the most important person ever, that everyone should be the boss of everything. /1
The raging narcissism, particularly of the cosplaying men who now deny that they wanted no part of any of the seditious stuff, is striking. Men who have a huge reserve of self regard that does not extend to shaving or wearing a clean shirt or other basic signs of adulthood. /2
These are people - again, especially the men - trapped in the eternal drama of adolescence. They are creatures of a leisure society, bored by the ordinariness of life, angry that the world is not more interesting and that others refuse to pay them their heroic due. /3
As Eric Hoffer noted - h/t @WindsorMann - this is the fetid breeding ground of extremism: "Faith in a holy cause is to a considerable extent a substitute for the lost faith in ourselves…Take away our holy duties and you leave our lives puny and meaningless."
/4
Even in 1951, Hoffer knew the danger of society of bored children: “There is perhaps no more reliable indicator of a society's ripeness for a mass movement than the prevalence of unrelieved boredom."
This, not rights or freedom, was what the past years of Trumpism are about. /5
There is no seriousness here, no sense of injustice, no actual injury to rights. Merely the aggrieved boredom of men (and some women) who never learned that life is not ceaselessly interesting and dramatic. That life, even the best life, is boring and repetitive on most days. /6
This is why the legal and *social* response should swift and clear. To remind people that life is not a TV show. It is not Twitter dunks and Facebook memes. To show that hurting other people out of boredom and childish narcissism has real consequences. /7
People who want to be heroes seem to have no patience with a normal workplace or the self-disciple involved in showing up and doing your best no matter what the job is. After all, Thor and Captain America didn't have to listen to their supervisor. /8
But life is heroic exactly when it is not dramatic. Taking care of your loved ones, looking after a sick friend, letting someone go ahead of you at a stop sign, hold the door for someone at a store. Adults know this. Stunted, selfish, undisciplined, stupid adolescents do not. /9
I am exhausted by turning on the news and realizing that the blessings of life in a liberal democracy have also produced a stubborn knot of bored children who think guns and flags and dumb slogans will give their lives meaning. /10
All I can do is suggest to other people in this society to treat these brutal, overgrown adolescents with as much distance as possible. To show them, by example, what stoicism and seriousness look like. To be the adults.
I know it's hard. I'm not consistent about it myself. /11
But amidst all the calls for unity, it's important to remember that unity and understanding can only happen between adults who agree to live peaceably. The people who defended sedition - and especially those who instigated it - are not those people. Those are armed toddlers. /12
I don't know what will change us. I sometimes think that a bit of social pressure on a man to wash his face in the morning and to dress differently from his pre-teen son might help. Other days, I think that nothing will work and pure, vulgar decadence will just end us. /13
And don't get me wrong: I don't underestimate the danger these people pose. They have threatened me directly and many other people I know. But there's not much you can do about that. But I don't have to pretend that "dangerous" means "serious and worthy of respect." /14
So maybe, now and then, we should all ask ourselves if we're taking things seriously enough - and if they are the *right* things to be taken seriously. And whether we are setting that example for others around us. Again, not sure I do that enough myself. /15
None of this means not to be light-hearted. I am, so often, utterly immature and unserious. (Except I'm right about Led Zeppelin.) But when it comes to living as an American, I hope I am as serious as can be. It's something we can all do. And we can insist on it from others. /16x
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Okay, I admit, I've been kind of rope-a-doping some of the people angry over my "it's okay to drop friends over politics posts." So I'll wrap up:
I don't recall anyone on my right getting mad when I wrote this in a right-wing - now insanely right wing - magazine in 2016. /1
The reason I got very little pushback, I suspect, is that no one expected Trump to win. But now, people on the right are stuck having to defend what they've done and itchy about it.
But interestingly, the same magazine also now has this:
/2
If you're angry over dropping friends and family over Trump now, but weren't in 2016, or aren't over calls now to de-recognize other citizens as Americans (and I assume that means friends who voted for Harris)...well...
/3
It's right on brand for the "fuck your feelings" crowd to say their vote, and the things they advocated for, must have no effect on any of their relationships with friends or family. Not only is that unrealistic, it's definitely whiny.
(And now let's remember some history.) /1
As a kid, I saw relationships among friends and family break over several issues - and especially Vietnam. No one back then said "You must treat me like a beloved friend or family member no matter what I say." People were, you know, grownups. They owned their politics. /2
I was there the night my parents and another couple ended their friendship because of Vietnam and the draft. (They said they'd drive their son to Canada if he was drafted.) When they left, all four of them knew it was done. As it turned out, that was okay with all of them. /3
Just as in 2016, Trump voters are the angriest winners I've ever seen.
🧵
/1
The thing that unites Trump voters with other extremists from right to left is that they are totalitarians. For them, winning an election isn't enough. Deep down, they doubt their own cause so they want you not only to accept their win, but to affirm them.
/2
An example on the left that appalled me was when SCOTUS ruled about gay marriage. There were a lot of people on the left who demanded not only that people accept the ruling, but embrace it and bake those gay wedding cakes. Sorry, but that's not how any of this works. /3
Uncharacteristically, I'll say that Dems should stop beating up on themselves and firing volleys back and forth. (They can get back to that later.) American voters - as I've been warning for years - are changing, and becoming more like Trump. That's hard to counteract. /1
Maybe the mistake we all made was thinking America would elect a Black woman. I had a gut feeling they would not. But in any case, when elections are about feelings, fantasies, boredom, and resentment, the candidate who services those delusions has a natural advantage. /2
Democrats are understandably focused on voters who flipped because they're suffering economically. But a far larger number of voters werfe un-flippable and not poor! They're the comfortable Trumpers who think, like, Canada conspired with Michelle O to hijack voting machines. /3
I used to encounter this among some senior officers I worked with who didn't think war college faculty should have tenure. But those who disliked the word "tenure" didn't dislike it enough that they stopped their kids from applying to top schools with faculties built on it. /1
And I know this because I asked. Many years ago, I asked an admiral where his colleagues sent their kids to college. He reeled off some impressive names. "Did they call and ask for the untenured faculty, or demand to see an ROI for one year at those schools?"
Response: 😡
/2
What it was really about is that some in the military leadership back then didn't want empowered and superior civilian faculty - for many reasons, which I'll write about another day. /3
I've been thinking about this article, and have now read the full CSIS report. Eliot and Phillips make some important points about expertise. But the idea that the experts botched this at the beginning seems to me to be some unduly harsh revisionism. /1
The basic issue seems to be: Why did so many analysts overestimate RU and underestimate UKR? And the answer seems to be something like: Because they're intellectually ossified and they did stuff like count tanks instead of thinking more about social and political factors. /2
I'm not sure that's fair, but in any case, it was only the reasonable bet to assume that Russia would be more competent. It was also, for UKR, the worst-case scenario - which most analysts are paid to think through and focus on.
Experts do not, and should not, wishcast. /3