Archives for posts with tag: Trump

trump torture

As a young adult I understood that there was no real difference between Hitler and Stalin. It didn’t matter that one of them was considered to come from the left while the other was depicted (by the communists but not exclusively) as a paragon of the right. Both of them had in common the absolute disrespect for everybody else. Each of them was convinced that only their opinions mattered and that all others were absolute morons.

That was when I started to have an inkling about what ‘the elders’ wanted to convey to us, green-horns bucking under the communist rule – which was crippling Romania at that time, when whispering:

‘there isn’t much difference between USSR and America. Their leaders want to rule as much of the world as they can grab while the ordinary people, in both countries, don’t have a clue about what’s going on’.

As I’ve become older I’ve started to figure out that the real difference between various activism-s has nothing to do with the ‘hue’ displayed on their banners. All that counts is the intensity of the sentiment that fuels them and the manner in which the activists relate to the other participants in the game.

At first glance the very notion of ‘conservative activist’ would be an oxymoron, given the fact that (most of the) conservatives define themselves as defenders of the existing order.
Who simply react, within the boundaries of the law and using the tenets of the Constitution, to whatever follies the progressive ‘liberal activists’ are trying to bring upon our heads:

“Like the American people I have watched this process for a number of years, and I fear this empathy standards is another step down the road to a liberal activist, results-oriented and relativistic world where — laws lose their fixed meaning, unelected judges set policy; Americans are seen as members of separate groups rather than simply Americans, and where the constitutional limits on government power are ignored when politicians want to buy out private companies… Call it empathy, call it prejudice, but whatever it is, it is not law. In truth, it is more akin to politics. And politics has no place in the courtroom.” (Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), speaking at Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation hearings)

As usual, practice trumps theory. Regardless of whatever the theory says – and some of the pundits pretend, everybody has an agenda and everybody who has an agenda is actually an activist.

Now that we’ve successfully climbed down to the practical level let’s see what’s the real meaning of Trump backing down from his trumped up stance on torture:

trump defending torture

Hey, wait a minute! So he actually said that ‘we should go tougher than waterboarding’ and he still has such a strong following among the ‘law abiding defenders of the Constitution’?

Well, I’m afraid things are more complicated than that.
Here’s what he says about those who trust him:

trump shooting people

“The people, my people, are so smart…
And you know what else? they say about my people? the polls?
They say I have the most loyal people! Did you ever see that?
Where I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose any voters.”

Well, if this isn’t ‘activism’ then I don’t know what else is.

But what kind of activism is it?
I’m not asking about where it should be placed in the political spectrum! I’m just wondering how are his proponents, Trump’s people, going to relate with their fellow citizens?
Or with the rest of the world…

And what’s the true meaning of the conservative activists coming out of the closet and assuming such an active stance? So active, in fact, that – as I said before – it is now way outside the realms of typical conservative behavior.

The explanation – as I see it – has little to do with Trump itself and everything with the present situation of the American society as a whole.

First things first.
Trump is nothing but an opportunistic bug, the real problem being how come the American Conservatives have not seen him for what he is and have not thrown him out yet.
I’ll concentrate on this from now on.

The American Conservatives, and not only those ‘loyal’ to Trump, behave as if they have been under a two thronged siege.
‘ The liberals are destroying America from within, the enemies from the outside are growing stronger and stronger yet the American Political Establishment does nothing meaningful about any of these, not even the ‘entrenched’ conservative ‘figureheads’.’

This didn’t start yesterday.

“Whenever you get a group of people together who share certain basic assumptions, there’s a natural tendency for the group to gravitate toward the most uncompromising, extreme, strident, fundamentalist, hard-core positions. Social psychologists call this tendency group polarization. It happens on juries with some regularity. It explains why the Tea Party became so insane, so deeply out of touch with the needs and views of the average American voter. And it explains why the Bush Administration invaded Iraq without an exit strategy (they stopped inviting people who disagreed with their assumptions—people like Colin Powell—to the planning meetings).” (John Faithful Hamer, From Here (2016))

But because of the internet things have gotten even worse:

“These days, any simpleminded partisan with a political ax to grind can find an online community of like-minded whack-jobs who’ll be happy to provide him with plenty of ideological ammunition (e.g., bogus stats, pre-fab arguments, etc.).” John Faithful Hamer, From Here (2016)

“Worse” not because of the ease with which these communities can grow but because too many of the members of these communities tend to give in to the apparent comfort and safety of single-mindedness.

Arguments are no longer able to penetrate the boundaries of this kind of communities.
Walls are erected to keep the odd man out. Then defended fiercely.

And this is why any attempt to cross those walls, be it aggressively or even in good faith, is too often perceived as a mortal threat by those within.

This is the mechanism through which the likes of Hitler and Stalin have managed to dominate for so long their hapless followers, by convincing them that all outsiders, all aliens, are conspiring to destroy ‘Das Vaterland’.

Fortunately the Internet works both ways. It’s true that the members of those communities can chose not to read anything else but the ideas promoted by their insiders but, just as easily, any of them can find out everything that ‘the others’ have to say about the matter.

But what if things are not (yet) as bleak as some of the media venues present them to be?
Not that all the media wants to scare the shit out of us or that all of them are politically biased. No. This happens simply because all of them want to make better ratings and because very few of them understand that ‘he who saws the wind will reap the whirlwind’. (Well, some of them might actually do it on purpose and that’s exactly what activism means but my post is more about those who let themselves be sucked into the whirlwind than about the tempest sowers).

A very short search of the Internet produced two extremely interesting ‘snapshots’.
The first, that the CPAC straw poll placed Trump no higher than the third place, should not surprise us very much. After all most of the participants are either GOP officials or young wannabees and for them Trump is akin to a ragging bull.
The second, though, is rather mind boggling.

gallup, candidates popularity, february 2016

Gallup, daily tracking

Four out of the six still running candidates nomination are perceived more or less unfavorably by the American public?

So what is this? A contest for ‘the least un-liked presidential candidate’ title? (The answer to this question might also explain why Trump has backed down on torture. He figured out that that was too much, even for him. And for ‘his people’.)

We couldn’t blame this on ‘activism’, as such – the remaining two candidates are also ‘active’, but shouldn’t we be asking ourselves about what kind of activism deserves our encouragement?

In any way, shape or form?

Well, before answering this we must consider another issue.
What brought us to the present situation, where both sides of the Political Establishment – and not only in America – are acting as if they want to tear everything apart instead of doing their best to make it all work together?

Lincoln activism

“Abraham Lincoln represented the entire nation, and his most serious actions were aimed at improving the lives of the oppressed and the poor. Lincoln’s values and actions still rank as the greatest period of social activism in the United States. Lincoln’s goal was to create a more perfect union by extending dignity to all — to once and for all end a diabolical, brutal, and oppressive system in which humans were property, mere production instruments.

In other words, Lincoln’s policies were designed for all of the people, not the just the wealthy, the privileged, or vested-interested lobbies.”

Later Edit

‘Conservative activism’ hasn’t been invented yesterday.
Nor by Trump’s supporters!

https://www.everand.com/article/357205089/Surviving-Koch-Nancy-Mac-Lean-Wants-You-To-Ignore-Donald-Trump

https://independentaustralia.net/business/business-display/murdoch-propaganda-machine-catastrophic-for-democracy,18117

unless fully prepared to deal with all the consequences of getting that something.

putin-on-bear-obama-in-tutu

dkyyy1lzegpux28x_o_eminem-be-careful-what-you-wish-for-cover-by-cruthe

Click here and read all the lyrics. Carefully. Twice!

 

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Thursday, Sept. 10, 2015, in Milwaukee. (Morry Gash/AP)

“Clinton hiring consumer marketing specialists “to help imagine Hillary 5.0.” “

Genuine democracy was about open discussion about all issues of public interest. It worked because openness made it so that the truly stupid (people and ideas) were weeded out before inflicting harm on a large scale.

The problem is that openness needs mutual respect.

Only that has become a thing of the past. Nowadays, when everyone knows better, political ideas are marketed like snake oil used to be not so long ago…

“Clinton’s campaign spent $18.7 million in the second quarter, dramatically more than any other. The mid-July report said she received $815,000 worth of services from strategist Joel Benenson’s firm alone. Since then, the campaign launched a $4 million ad blitz in Iowa and New Hampshire.”

“Steve Schmidt, the Republican strategist, puts it somewhat more crudely: “Trump’s starring in a reality show of his own making, and treats every appearance like an episode,” chasing ratings in the form of fresh votes. But how do you turn appointment TV into a lasting candidacy? “You need a huge team on the ground doing the nuts-and-bolts work — collecting signatures to be on the ballot in certain states, bringing voters to the polls — and Trump is very late to the party,” says Cohn. “Most of his rivals have been at this over a year, and have those seasoned operatives locked up. And even if they’re available, is he really prepared to pay them a premium now?” ”
This third quote is from Rolling Stone’s “Trump Seriously: On the Trail With the GOP’s Tough Guy” by Bob Solotaroff.

I know some of you are quite familiar with these political realities but don’t you get goose bumps about what’s going on, at least occasionally?

How come these species of political operators are so sure about themselves being entitled to do what they are doing that they have no qualms when doing it?

Can any of these occurrences be, even remotely, associated with the concept of democracy? Or have we, all of us, demoted the whole process to just a little more than ‘mob rule’? A contest among spin doctors about who is the more competent manipulator?

I thought the modern mantra was ‘make as much money as you can, in a legal way – if possible’….
Meanwhile the likes of Trump are lionized for their exploits yet those who are happy to nibble some crumbs from Uncle Sam’s table are treated with scorn!
Is there any real difference between Trump using eminent domain to rob people of their homes and the guys depicted above scamming the federal budget?

You may also want to check what Snopes.com has to say about the matter.

Image

Romania, the country I was born in and I dearly love, is in a mess.
The US, a country for which I feel a profound gratitude, is deeply divided across numerous fault lines.
Ukrainians have such a low opinion on Russia, their former big brother, that Moscow has to resort to bribing in order to lure Kiev out of joining the EU.

How did we get here?

Romanians have elected Traian Basescu – an ex sea captain – as President, not so much because of his promise: ‘You should live better!’ but mostly because they were fed up with the arrogance displayed by his opponent. 9 years later, fed up with the way Basescu has maneuvered his pet prime minister into wrecking the economy, Romanians have brought to power a new prime minister who has promised to keep Basescu on a short leash. What was the first thing this new prime minister has done? A formal ‘non-aggression’ pact with the president, as if the constitution wasn’t a good enough to frame relations between the presidency and the government. Now the pact is already broken and for the last month or so the two are accusing each other of corruption while the EU is trying to asses if Romania is mature enough to join the Schengen group of selected countries who trust one another so much as to give up border controls altogether.

The Americans elected Obama, a charismatic leader, hoping he will lead them out of the cul-de-sac where the lackluster but rather rigid G.W. Bush has left them. Do you remember ‘Yes, we can!’? I must confess I was thrilled at the time but I was also weary: ‘What if he will not be able to fulfill all the hope his people has put on his shoulders?’ Now, six years later, Obama’s main promise – an affordable health care system to cover everybody – is in shambles and he has shifted his priorities to a ‘war on poverty’, a move seen by the conservatives as another trick intended to widen the scope of the already ‘too powerful central government’.

The Russians, disillusioned with the chaotic ways of Boris Eltsin – on whose reign the country was left to the mercy of a few oligarchs (pun intended) – brought to power an ex KGB operative. Now, 13 years later, his grip on power is almost as comprehensive as it was that enjoyed by the communist leaders while the country still depends on exporting vast amounts of energy from fast dwindling reserves. Meanwhile its neighbors see Russia as a less scary but no less spiteful version of the old USSR.

What is to be done?

A couple of days ago I took a cab, in Bucharest. The driver, fed up with the constant bickering between the Romanian political leaders, ejaculated: ‘What we need is a dictatorship. A honest guy, preferable from the military, that will clean up this mess!’. While not very common this belief – that current problems could be solved by a ‘honest and benevolent’ dictator, a “Tatuca” (Father in Romanian) – is spreading again. In fact this is exactly how Putin acceded to power in Russia.

Last night I happened to ‘stumble’ on Donald Trump speaking to CNN’s Piers Morgan. ‘What we need is more leadership. We need someone to take the bull by the horns!’ (Unfortunately the clip posted by CNN on the Youtube starts exactly after Trump had finished speaking about ‘leadership’ but you can still read the caption about the ‘bull’s horns’. Still, it is worth watching, you’ll find out about how popular Donald Trump is among the restaurant owners).

It seems that finally the Russians, the Americans and the Romanians have reached common ground.

But would this be a wise thing to do?

To me it seems obvious that while the empires/dictatorships fell/failed rather sooner than later a more stable form of running things is true democracy. After all history provides plenty examples of how peoples who organized themselves based  on mutual respect fared a lot better than those who let themselves to be bullied around. One caveat though, modern democracy seems less and less based on respect and honest efforts to find the common ground and more on tricks performed with the intent to manipulate the masses.

So what will you have, authoritarianism, demagoguery or mutual respect?

PS.
I asked the cabbie ‘OK, but how to you find the right guy for the job?’
I left him scratching his head in search for an answer.