Trumpism
The Trump version of the Republican party seems to be built on the idea of preserving a status quo, a social structure, that is under attack. I hope the attack works. I hope it dwindles and dies away. The draw down of this status is what gives the Trumpist the source of his anger. This status has been there as long as this country has been in existence. It is unsurprising that the threat of its removal would generate rage.
For me this central aspect here is their view is that their view of society is the only correct view of society. And because it is the only correct view of society it must be imposed on all of society. This means if you are different in some way from this view you should lose your rights. Let's look at feminism. All a feminist says is that women should have the same rights and privileges as men. But this is a threat. And it must be suppressed. What if you believe in another god, or no god? This is, clearly, a bad thing because you've chosen something different than the correct choice. One interesting place this crops up is in display of religious content in government spaces. Why would you want to display something from a religion that isn't the correct religion? Guns are another interesting point. If you believe in the primacy of the male defending his home, then guns make sense. If you believe in the community hiring a police force to defend your home, they make less sense. All of this comes down to a basic functional difference. If you think your views are the only correct views you are on one side. If you think a diversity of views is important, you are on the other side. And, of course, all of the dog whistles about brown people have to do with a centuries old social structure.
I should possibly note that I'm as WASPy as it gets. Pretty pale. Actually Anglo-Saxon (well, English and German). The Protestantism I have refused, but that is another essay. That I am WASPy isn't all that interesting except in the things I didn't used to see. When you are in a privileged group and live in a privileged community, there are things you won't see. Not because they aren't there, but because they don't happen to you.
You don't have to believe anything I've written here. You have that right. Should some of this seem worth pursuing I suggest two lines of research for you. One is political history and the other is social-cultural history.
For political history I suggest reading the Wikipedia article on the "Southern Strategy" (Southern Strategy). The Republican party has been exploiting racial tension since the election between Johnson and Goldwater. A fuller exploration of this is in E.J. Dionne's book "Why the Right Went Wrong: Conservatism: From Goldwater to Trump and Beyond".
The social-cultural part has to do with knowing actual female people and actual brown people. This sounds stupid. I get it. I'm suggesting to you that being white and male insulates you. And not necessarily in a good way. I suggest you talk to women and brown folks (female brown folks if you can find one who will talk to you). If you can gain their trust (not an easy feat for a white male) you might hear some things. You might talk to them about their experiences with white men. White men hold a dominate social position. And they enforce it. Woman can expect unwanted sexual advances. And in a horrifying number of examples much worse. I suggest you ask the google how many women are sexually assaulted. I trust you are horrified at the numbers. Brown people can expect a whole host of indignities. It ranges from "Driving While Black" to unarmed death at the hands of the police. One of the nastiest aspects is the "Brown People Are Lazy" trope. I invite you to consider being the victim of this.
The Republican party has made a simple promise. Elect us, let us take what we want from the Corporate bosses that hold our leashes, and we will help you preserve the status you crave.
As proof of this I suggest the vehemence of the Republican party against the Democratic is precisely this potential loss of status. The Democratic support for women and brown folk is a direct attack on this status.
Another proof of my position is that this status is the only real aspect of Republican 'policy'. All of the other supposed ideals of Republicans have been tossed to the curb. Republicans used to be interested in international trade. Still true? Nope. Insane trade wars instead. Republicans used to be interested in international cooperation with our allies in furtherance of our shared ideals. Still true? Nope. The trade wars are, in part, focused directly on our 'allies'. Fiscal responsibility used to be a tried and true Republican ideal. Still true? Nope. Republicans just added one trillion dollars to the national debt. And Republicans are using that to argue that social services should be cut. And why should social services be cut? Because brown people are lazy. See how this works? Never mind that white people get a quite large section of the social services.
Trumpism is not built on Republican ideals. Trumpism is built on white grievance. He has sided with a degenerate section of our society. Suppression of independent journalism? Sure. Encouragement of violence? Sure. Degradation of women? Sure. Racism? Sure. All of these appeal to his 'base'. What is his base? Who are the people that approve of this? Why did they elect a man that boasted of sexual assault? Why did they vote for a man that is clearly racist? Why did they vote for a man who is clearly an idiot?
I think the answer is clear.
For me this central aspect here is their view is that their view of society is the only correct view of society. And because it is the only correct view of society it must be imposed on all of society. This means if you are different in some way from this view you should lose your rights. Let's look at feminism. All a feminist says is that women should have the same rights and privileges as men. But this is a threat. And it must be suppressed. What if you believe in another god, or no god? This is, clearly, a bad thing because you've chosen something different than the correct choice. One interesting place this crops up is in display of religious content in government spaces. Why would you want to display something from a religion that isn't the correct religion? Guns are another interesting point. If you believe in the primacy of the male defending his home, then guns make sense. If you believe in the community hiring a police force to defend your home, they make less sense. All of this comes down to a basic functional difference. If you think your views are the only correct views you are on one side. If you think a diversity of views is important, you are on the other side. And, of course, all of the dog whistles about brown people have to do with a centuries old social structure.
I should possibly note that I'm as WASPy as it gets. Pretty pale. Actually Anglo-Saxon (well, English and German). The Protestantism I have refused, but that is another essay. That I am WASPy isn't all that interesting except in the things I didn't used to see. When you are in a privileged group and live in a privileged community, there are things you won't see. Not because they aren't there, but because they don't happen to you.
You don't have to believe anything I've written here. You have that right. Should some of this seem worth pursuing I suggest two lines of research for you. One is political history and the other is social-cultural history.
For political history I suggest reading the Wikipedia article on the "Southern Strategy" (Southern Strategy). The Republican party has been exploiting racial tension since the election between Johnson and Goldwater. A fuller exploration of this is in E.J. Dionne's book "Why the Right Went Wrong: Conservatism: From Goldwater to Trump and Beyond".
The social-cultural part has to do with knowing actual female people and actual brown people. This sounds stupid. I get it. I'm suggesting to you that being white and male insulates you. And not necessarily in a good way. I suggest you talk to women and brown folks (female brown folks if you can find one who will talk to you). If you can gain their trust (not an easy feat for a white male) you might hear some things. You might talk to them about their experiences with white men. White men hold a dominate social position. And they enforce it. Woman can expect unwanted sexual advances. And in a horrifying number of examples much worse. I suggest you ask the google how many women are sexually assaulted. I trust you are horrified at the numbers. Brown people can expect a whole host of indignities. It ranges from "Driving While Black" to unarmed death at the hands of the police. One of the nastiest aspects is the "Brown People Are Lazy" trope. I invite you to consider being the victim of this.
The Republican party has made a simple promise. Elect us, let us take what we want from the Corporate bosses that hold our leashes, and we will help you preserve the status you crave.
As proof of this I suggest the vehemence of the Republican party against the Democratic is precisely this potential loss of status. The Democratic support for women and brown folk is a direct attack on this status.
Another proof of my position is that this status is the only real aspect of Republican 'policy'. All of the other supposed ideals of Republicans have been tossed to the curb. Republicans used to be interested in international trade. Still true? Nope. Insane trade wars instead. Republicans used to be interested in international cooperation with our allies in furtherance of our shared ideals. Still true? Nope. The trade wars are, in part, focused directly on our 'allies'. Fiscal responsibility used to be a tried and true Republican ideal. Still true? Nope. Republicans just added one trillion dollars to the national debt. And Republicans are using that to argue that social services should be cut. And why should social services be cut? Because brown people are lazy. See how this works? Never mind that white people get a quite large section of the social services.
Trumpism is not built on Republican ideals. Trumpism is built on white grievance. He has sided with a degenerate section of our society. Suppression of independent journalism? Sure. Encouragement of violence? Sure. Degradation of women? Sure. Racism? Sure. All of these appeal to his 'base'. What is his base? Who are the people that approve of this? Why did they elect a man that boasted of sexual assault? Why did they vote for a man that is clearly racist? Why did they vote for a man who is clearly an idiot?
I think the answer is clear.
Comments
Post a Comment