I'm glad I don't have to write an endorsement piece, because I really wouldn't know how to go about it. Ever since 2015, when Trump descended the escalator, I have had the same feeling, which I've never quite seen articulated, so I will briefly try:
It's basically this: Trump is so obviously, manifestly repugnant -- his words, his gestures, his behavior, his history -- that it strikes me like a tsunami. It's a kind of total, perfect, seamless repugnance that I've never witnessed before in my life. Which means ...
... pointing out some particular piece of the repugnance & arguing against it feels ... surreal, I guess. "He has regularly sexually assaulted women, almost certainly raped a few, and ... I think that's bad."
Yeah. I mean, I think rape is bad. But here's the thing ...
... if you think rape is bad, you will already oppose Trump. If you don't, what could I possibly say to reach you? I don't understand your moral universe, your basic precepts. We are different in a way so fundamental that I literally don't know how to speak to you.
It's the same with all of it. I could point to some obvious bit of repugnance -- "I think it's bad to cheat every small business you interact with." -- but ... it's obvious. You've surely see it yourself. And it doesn't matter to you. So how is me pointing it out going to help?
You see what I'm getting at? I feel like there's nothing I can say about Trump that isn't obvious, that isn't well-understood public knowledge. If you still support him at this point, you clearly don't *care* about tall that stuff. And if you don't care about all that stuff ...
... then ... what do you care about? How does your brain operate? What does morality mean to you? What language could possibly reach you? What could cause you to care? I genuinely don't know. It's like when you're trying to speak w/ someone who doesn't speak your language ...
... and you respond by just repeating yourself, louder. "HE'S A CAREER CRIMINAL WITH 34 FELONY CONVICTIONS." It's pointless. They *heard* you. They just don't understand, don't care. You're assuming they share the premise "criminal rapists are bad," but they don't.
And so, if you're that far apart -- if you do not share basic, fundamental moral precepts, if you live in different moral universes -- how can you communicate? Literally, what do you say?
So I could write the 5000th piece once again listing Trump's sins -- "He's explicitly said he loves dictators & wants to be one!" -- but they've all been listed a million times. His supporters don't care. And I wouldn't know what to write to make someone care or be decent.
That's where I've been ever since 2015: feeling like language is pointless. Like the reality I inhabit is so far from the reality Trump supporters inhabit that discourse between us is impossible, or at least futile. The divide is unbridgeable.
This is a genuinely depressing & unsettling place to be for someone whose whole *life* is words, who was raised & trained to believe that language can, with care & attention, bridge any gap, excavate & find commonalities among any people, no matter how far apart.
Anyway. I just wanted to get that feeling down. Maybe some of you feel it too.
In the meantime, my grand manifesto against electing Trump amounts to this:
[points at Trump]
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This is just one way that the entire system is set up to ensure 50/50 results. It's homeostatic -- if one side starts to do well, systems (journalism, polling, PAC money) move into action to balance it.
If you get a poll leaning in one direction, it prompts polls leaning in the other direction. If one side's rich people create a substantial spending advantage, the other side's rich people ratchet up their spending.
And above all: if there's a Puerto-Rico-joke PR disaster on one side, it prompts effusive "Biden gaffe" coverage on the other side.
This homeostasis is not the result of any grand conspiracy, it's just an outcome of politics infused with money & treated like a reality show.
Christ, reading anything about the rise of Hitler is so unsettling these days. The key thing is that there was nothing inevitable about it -- he rose to power thanks to a few thoughtless decisions by the small, feckless men around him. Sound familiar?
Goebbels, 1928: "The big joke on democracy is that it gives its mortal enemies the tools to its own destruction."
It's also chilling to read how many times the Nazis failed before they succeeded -- they were broke & unpopular in the early 1930s -- and how many times they were written off. Hitler dismissed all these press reports as a "witch hunt." Sound familiar?
Bezos is just doing what the entire US elite has done for years, what many many center-left pundits still do constantly: contemplate the results of a coordinated 60-year assault on media (& other mainstream institutions) from the right & conclude a) this is our fault, and ...
... b) if we cringe more, indulge in even more self-hatred, blunt accuracy even more in the name of "balance," bend over farther backward, we can reclaim the trust of people who have said, clearly, for decades now, that they want us dead & gone, not improved.
You see the heads of institution after institution -- social media, academia, etc. -- submit to this same shit. It's difficult to tell which of them are actually dumb enough to fall for it & which of them secretly agree with the RW, but either way the result is the same.
Thank you @Mike_Podhorzer for writing this so that I feel slightly less insane. The US is on the verge of real, bona fide, violent fascism of the sort we gawk at in history books and, to a first approximation, our civic leaders don't seem that worried. weekendreading.net/p/sleepwalking…
We are, in other words, sleepwalking our way into fascism *exactly the same way previous countries have sleepwalked their way into fascism*. Exactly. All the same beats, the same dynamics, the same rhetoric. We have learned NOTHING from history. It's just fucking amazing.
Nothing makes me want to simultaneously laugh & puke these days quite like the phrase "never again." Everyone says that in the wake of every fascist atrocity, with great solemnity, and yet we do it again. And again. We're doing it again right fucking now.
This quote from Trump captures the beating heart of reactionary authoritarianism better than anything I've ever seen: "I think it is a threat. I think everything is a threat. There is nothing that is not a threat."
That is not a conclusion drawn from evidence, it is ...
... reflective of deep psychological, even neurological, structures. For whatever reason -- genetics, early childhood development, whatever -- Trump has been left with hyperactive "sensitivity to threat," as they call it. Everything else issues from that.
High sensitivity to threat yields the classic authoritarian personality: averse to ambiguity or uncertainty; attracted to simplicity & clear lines between in groups & out groups; selfishness & an assumption that *everyone* is selfish & only threat of punishment maintains order.
Kudos to @Noahpinion for refusing this absurd assignment. And the @washingtonpost should be ashamed of itself for still, at this late date, failing to understand Trump & his movement. noahpinion.blog/p/against-stee…
As @whstancil has articulated so well, the whole appeal of fascism is that it releases you from any obligation to be decent or intellectually curious or coherent in your beliefs. It is a permission structure to wallow in your basest instincts, which is why it attracts assholes.
@whstancil When Trump tries to pitch his giant nationwide pogrom as a solution to the housing crisis, he is bullshitting. He's reverse engineering some plausible rationale for what he & his followers really want, which is to make brown people suffer.