Thanks for this lovely perspective - you've captured the zeitgeist beautifully.
And, while I know a lot of people did vote for this administration (admittedly without wanting the ensuing carnage), let's also not forget that only one of the seven swing states whose electors brought us this dumpster fire have actually audited their election results -- which, as one cybersecurity expert put it, were a 35M to 1 outcome. Let's all please demand that the states, ALL the states, audit their 2024 elections, and put in place mandatory audits for the 2026 elections, to ensure some electoral accountability. See electiontruthalliance.org for more info.
Yep. The democrats fell into a trap with their “election denier” labels after 2020. How could they try and make the case that Trump stole the election in 2024, after arguing so consistently and convincingly that our elections are secure? Elections in the U.S. aren’t secure and haven’t been since 2000. Too many electronic machines introduced after the hanging chad debacle that cost Gore the 2000 election are too easily hacked. This is one of the issues with not having any consistent federal standards for election equipment and procedures. On the other hand, as Chris Murphy points out in a post above, it is precisely this individual State based system of our federal republic which gives us hope for any solution to the rapid dismantling of the U.S. bureaucracy we are witnessing.
Why would you want a solution to the "rapid dismantling of the US bureaucracy"? The dismantling of the unaccountable administrative state is the solution. Would that it were more rapid.
you think you win in this scenario? you needn't look past the self-important and disturbing ramblings of curtis yarvin (discussed on this very blog) to see that you're carrying out the job of preemptive compliance for the darkest among us. please wake up
You capture the moment perfectly re. the sense of suspension. Like we don't realize yet that it was the Support Beams that they were removing, not the unnecessary ones; and yeah we are still within the building (our shared governance) in question. So we have not only the destroyed buildings but also 350 million people caught under the rubble. Oh well.
I half agree with Chris Murphy's comment (angry! appalled! disappointed in our siloed national discourse; believing that black women are the touchstone for our country's truth ) and the other side of me really appreciates your kinder view of our fellow americans. What else can we do but forgive and forget whomever will join in and help get us out of this national disaster. If we are not fighting for all people, we are part of the same problem we are trying to escape.
We need a Non Violent Warrior Philosophy right now. We are a country formed in violence, steeped in violence, run by violence and it is tempting to want to try to solve things with violence.
Let's dismantle the violent state if we get the chance to rebuild this country. My Libertarianism is in the area of community policing; local and quick adjudication of nonviolent crime; equitable treatment for violent crimes and restorative justice options or reparations; severely reducing the carceral state, no private prisons; denying the state any rights to kill domestically; reining in the military industrial complex; quick support in defense against aggressive actors; transparency of international aims and democratic means of determining all of the above.
We need to hold Truth as the North Star, no matter what our individual beliefs and goals. Truth is not one and done, it is a daily wrestling match, and without aspiring to a shared sense of Truth, I do not see how we can live together.
I'll add a point of clarity on my "threaten them" comment. It's not advocacy of any sort of violence. It's advocating disassociation.
Democrats spent effort claiming Trumpism is a fascist movement. OK, then why are we inviting fascists over for Thanksgiving for fuck's sake? We are sending mixed messages.
That's what I mean by threaten. Threaten to kick them to the curb. The time to have done this was before the 2016 election, it's that overdue. But certainly prior to 2024 election.
We just don't have it in us, we coddle. And that is permission. It's not polite, it's meek. And weakness leads to aggression.
What should we do tonight about the CR? I live near the Capitol and I do want to physically be there to stop the Democrats from singing this piece of shit that begins the destruction of our amazing city . DC is being sacrificed .
It is so convoluted that no one can even grasp—they are taking our Local Taxes away from us. Our already paid deposits on this years schools, police, infrastructure and treating us like fodder.
I've been really interested in WHY so many people ignored the part about "rapist, felon, and vile insurrectionist." I don't think they are all voting in APPROVAL of those qualities, but have certainly come to disregard them. For that, I have contemplated how propaganda works and how the unspoken assumptions it relies on develop. This is one of my ruminations.
Years ago, when I was teaching The Left Hand of Darkness to college freshmen, I realized that there is a sense in which 1+1=3 is a true fact in the world. The equation, of course, is one man +one woman = man, woman, baby. (Well, it can also be 1+1 = 4 or 5 or even six, given multiple births).
To see this you have to shift perspectives, or terms, or definitions. You have to accept that "1" doesn't always have to be the simple start of the counting-line of integers and that = can mean "results in" in a way that math doesn't contemplate.
Since then I have mused on many occasions aboutthis shift, and its use in propaganda--first, Soviet,* and more recently, the twisting of "reality" of the increasingly reactionary right.
1+1 = 3 is a "truth" that can't be accepted without an overt explanation of the twist. The evil genius of propaganda aimed against "truths we hold to be self evident" is that it slides the shift on its hearers gradually, in baby steps, so that when it has fulfilled its intended mission, the shift has simply produced an unstated assumption the hearer can agree with on its face, without bothering to question the assumption.
We see this in the coopting of originally liberal terms and ideas into swear words or words appealing to an underlying prejudice that the hearer may not even recognize is such. Examples are woke, DEI, religious liberty, freedom/liberty in general, CRT, and most recently, "peace."
DEI provides us with a history of how this works. As far as I can tell, it was developed as an ALTERNATIVE to the harsher requirements of Affirmative Action in its full, gotta-fill-a-quota, form. The idea was to broaden the REACH of recruiting beyond the usual suspects (be it college applicants or job applicants) where the pool of applicants had previously been those who had already thought about college or KNEW about a job opening. Thus, broader advertising of job openings in jobs, active recruiting of what my university called "preferentially admitted" students--those who showed talent not reflected in grades or test stores, and who weren't included in whatever the max number of students for the freshman class was, so no one who was admitted was taking anyone's "place." ** It could simply be advertising job openings in Historically Black Colleges --or women's colleges, if such still exist-- or in other ways in predominantly minority communities
I gather (I retired before DEI became a "thing') that it also involved educating existing employees in the basics of "don't be an asshole." This was the first wedge, I think. People don't like to be told what to think, and if the education is hamfisted,*** hostility grows). From there, such hostility was compounded by myths that it included quotas or required hiring of people of less competence than other candidates. These myths arose from the widespread dislike of the quota aspects of Affirmative Action, dislike by even minorities who felt labeled as somehow by definition less competent. I also think that there was infection from the attempts to hold schools "accountable" by focusing on test scores as the definition of success. No one considers that of two people applying for a job with, say, pretty close to equal keyboarding skills, competence can also include things like the ability to get along with people, as opposed to a narcissistic personality. HR decisions aren't entirely guided by numbers, even "accurate words per minute."
The part of DEI that was most suspect was Diversity. I'm pretty sure that if you asked even the devotees of the idea that we are already a "colorblind society" that they would have to agree that "equity and inclusion" taken alone were pretty much part of "all men are create equal." But once the idea of Diversity was connected to Quota-land, the connotations migrated over to equity and inclusion; the unspoken assumption grew that those words mean something different in the context of DEI.
I'm not sure that everyone who opposes DEI under these conditions is (or was) a racist or sexist. Some just can't accept that a minority or woman could POSSIBLY be more competent than they themselvers are. Frankly, there are probably women who don't think a MAN could be more competent then they themselves are. From a personal belief, however, this broadens into a belief that no minority/woman/man could possibly be more competent that anyone in the group the believer belongs to--the rise of tribalism clearly boosts this. I do think that the attacks on DEI, by reinforcing such unspoken assumptions, is increasing the amount of racism and sexism in society, its existence hidden from those now agreeing with it.
And so the assumptions behind the concept of DEI have morphed into unspoken assumptions that turn the phrase itself into a swear word. And from THERE, the whole concept of Civil Rights itself falls under attack. Simply by using the term DEI to include basic, law-enshrined rights against discrimination in its purview, the latter are turned magically into discrimination. (After all, why would a company set up TWO separate departments for basically the same thing: the ideals of at the least equity and inclusion. That would be duplicative). I just saw that one agency has simply eliminated its Civil Rights division head/department because the title included DEI. Who is left to enforce basic Civil Rights?
One can do the same kind of analysis with the other "swear words" I've mentioned. At this point, I am most fascinated by the redefinition by Drump of the word Peace. He has slip-slid it into the infamous "Peace in Our Time" by equating it with "bowing to an aggressor and giving them the benefits of their aggression." I suspect that most people when they think about aggression on a smaller scale--the school yard bully--would agree that a school that said "yes, for purposes of playground peace you should just give up your lunch money" would be misusing the word peace.
But trump has also lit up the fears us older types have left over from the Cold war by accusing Ukraine of encouraging WWIII. Putin threatens nuclear arms in overcoming Ukraine, but as a practical matter taking over its resources for Russian use would be rather hampered by huge areas of long term radiation. I'm not sure what direction the prevailing winds are in various parts of Ukraine, but Putin MUST realize that even his supporters would not like fallout over their dachas. Putin is a tyrant, but he is a consistent tyrant, not the nutso one we have currently trying to blast our democracy and our very way of privileged life by non-nuclear means. Whatever bad things are involved in Putin's own personality, I rather think totally "uninformed" isn't included.
And thus we get to the real danger of building a narrative based on unspoken and illegitimate assumptions--what happens when the propagandists believe their own propaganda? What happens when the "socially constructed reality" which they so decry but use to control the masses becomes THEIR reality? What happens when the equation becomes 1+1 = 0: people (1) and government (1) becoming total anarchy.
*back in the day we actually got TAUGHT the techniques of propaganda, though the examples were always Soviet.
**(I taught English to students in one such program: it was a tremendous experience of how "brightness" doesn't equal formal education, and apparently successful in mainstreaming kids--by no means not all minorities--into a college education. I ran into one of my students much later, a kid who had no idea what a sentence was. He had just graduated in architecture and was heading to grad school).
*** Hamfisted could also involve the hiring process where some in HR also thought they were obliged to give PREFERENCE to minority/female applicants in patently unfair ways. Neither form of hamfisting is part of the INTENT of DEI.
A persistent friction exists between the order demanded by the Constitution, and the Trump branded patrimonial style of government presently operating. Like the underlying cause for earthquakes, the pressure is building.
The arbitrary, capricious, brutal, adversarial and incompetent nature of Trumpism makes its collapse inevitable.
I am not quite as pessimistic as Brock, though. There's a path by which the states can provide the necessary stability. The states have their own executives and legislatures. They are themselves republics, empires of laws not of men. They are not Donald's play things to do with as he wishes. If he is the unitary executive, it is of the federal government alone. This is yet another example of American polyarchy, and ambition to counter ambition.
Three-fourths of the states, given sufficient duress and compromise, can "reboot" the federal government without any federal government involvement. Anything three quarters of the states can agree upon is possible.
The fact the federal institutions are weak is to our benefit. We're not supposed to be looking for heroes to save us. We're supposed to be the heroes. We the people. Or perhaps hero worship is passe? Fine then. We fucked it up. And it is up to us, alone, to unfuck it.
The election of an anti-Constitution president is not consent to sweep away the constitutional republic. The law is paramount. States will persist through the chaos, and to whatever degree the federal government is in abeyance, it will be restored. No one gave consent, let alone three-quarters of us, to set aside the Constitution just because we elected Fuckface von Clownstick as POTUS again.
The propaganda of the Democratic party is that everything is normal, should remain normal. That sitting in silence, doing nothing while Al Green shows a way to resist, while Trump attacks Elizabeth Warren, while decorum is continuously breached. It's obscenely pathetic that the Democratic party engages in their own brand of normalizing this deviancy. This is also propaganda. There's nothing normal about what's going on.
I’m not sure you can make blanket statements about the Democratic party and “normalcy.” Some seem to be too timid, but not all. My Senator Patty Murray didn’t go at all. I do wish more had walked out after the expulsion of Green, perhaps returning to the back with signs that said “why didn’t Pelosi expel MTG and Boebutt.” I’m not sure that there are many DEMOCRAT, as opposed to party reps and leaders, who think any of this is normal.
WaPo, despite all the condemnation of Bezos, had a pretty telling private poll (not a very scientific ones, but still) on who exactly “approves” of trump, his diatribe, or any of his particular policies. Other sources show that the “approval” of the speech was partly because older GOP folks were the main people actually watching it. I DO wonder what the 7% of Harris voters polled who approve how Dump is handling the economy are thinking. Perhaps they just lied about who they voted for.
Not sure I see a lot of difference, in the context of a government, between chaos and anarchy. I agree about the role the states can play and that they can persist through chaos. But my own sense is that— before I can shuffle off my mortal coil, shortly before the projected inability of Social Security to PAY— that blue states will be conjoined with Canada, if not their own nation. (Geographically, conjoined makes more sense: otherwise there are Idaho, Montana, and the Dakotas between Cascadia and the next over blue place.
I agree btw, with prognosticators that Forces of Musk can destroy Social Security for those still unable to take it. Just making it impossible to APPLY will do that. It will be harder to take it away from those already getting it. There IS that pesky statute that would need voiding, and neither Musk nor trump can really do that, even if Clarence and Alito think they should be able to.
Excellent observation about the weightlessness that occurs when the upward momentum of a political situation encounters the gravity of reality. It is increasingly apparent that the country cannot continue with Trump unrestrained and caught up in full-blown narcissism. What's next? J.D. Vance is politically accident-prone and almost equally unfit for office. Mike Johnson is practically a spinning dervish, constantly trying to figure out which way the wind is blowing so he knows when to duck. Hardly a leader. That leaves Marco Rubio.
Exactly what I have been saying for so long. But people don't want to hear it or aren't ready. MAGA voters are demonized and labelled and put in a box of standing for everything Trump does. I abhor all it stands for, however I believe it was driven by economics. Not just the recent inflation, although that may have been the inflection point, but the economic insecurity of such a large number of people. They needed solutions, were promised them, and never saw them. I believe they need to see, and unfortunately now experience the pain of making the wrong choice to understand Trump is not the solution.
If we are going to get out of this, they need to realize what the real obstacle is to their struggles and we all need to be united after so much effort has been made to divide us.
We've been living through the Curse of Knowledge. Hopefully we are entering the a time when we all start to actually agree on our needs and who the true culprits are. Maybe we are beginning to, but don't realize it yet.. There seems to be non-partisan unhappiness with what is happening. This is a key ingredient if we have any chance to turn this around
They did not vote for dignity. They voted for a rapist, a felon, and a vile insurrectionist.
And we were unable or unwilling to persuade them or even threaten them when it could have mattered.
You're welcome to just leave it at that.
But instead you paint a picture of pathetic, gullible morons who should be papered over as something they aren't. It's the same coddling, forgiveness in advance, invite them to the usual social gatherings that all of them saw as permission.
Desperate?
Black women, to pick a single demographic that exemplifies the working class, did not get duped by this bullshit.
By all means make the case it's mass hysteria, brainwashing, addiction to depravity, collective narcissism, delusional - something that explains how this happened in terms that permits accountability and rehabilitation.
But to say they voted for dignity? It's utter bullshit. In no universe were people who voted for a complete piece of shit (always has been, always will be) voting for dignity. For anybody.
Say they're insane. And you hope we find a cure.
But don't peddle bullshit. That will make matters much worse.
True, sleepwalking into tyranny. There are those in the democratic party that are so completely tied to the party that they remain optimistic that they are plow horse with blinders. They may see where they want to head but cannot see the periphery where the potentially irreversible damage is taking place.
Thanks for this lovely perspective - you've captured the zeitgeist beautifully.
And, while I know a lot of people did vote for this administration (admittedly without wanting the ensuing carnage), let's also not forget that only one of the seven swing states whose electors brought us this dumpster fire have actually audited their election results -- which, as one cybersecurity expert put it, were a 35M to 1 outcome. Let's all please demand that the states, ALL the states, audit their 2024 elections, and put in place mandatory audits for the 2026 elections, to ensure some electoral accountability. See electiontruthalliance.org for more info.
Yep. The democrats fell into a trap with their “election denier” labels after 2020. How could they try and make the case that Trump stole the election in 2024, after arguing so consistently and convincingly that our elections are secure? Elections in the U.S. aren’t secure and haven’t been since 2000. Too many electronic machines introduced after the hanging chad debacle that cost Gore the 2000 election are too easily hacked. This is one of the issues with not having any consistent federal standards for election equipment and procedures. On the other hand, as Chris Murphy points out in a post above, it is precisely this individual State based system of our federal republic which gives us hope for any solution to the rapid dismantling of the U.S. bureaucracy we are witnessing.
Why would you want a solution to the "rapid dismantling of the US bureaucracy"? The dismantling of the unaccountable administrative state is the solution. Would that it were more rapid.
you think you win in this scenario? you needn't look past the self-important and disturbing ramblings of curtis yarvin (discussed on this very blog) to see that you're carrying out the job of preemptive compliance for the darkest among us. please wake up
https://open.substack.com/pub/mikebrock/p/momentary-weightlessness?selection=89d6c82c-b97d-46f2-9a05-0442955dbadd&r=1pi3e&utm_medium=ios
You capture the moment perfectly re. the sense of suspension. Like we don't realize yet that it was the Support Beams that they were removing, not the unnecessary ones; and yeah we are still within the building (our shared governance) in question. So we have not only the destroyed buildings but also 350 million people caught under the rubble. Oh well.
I half agree with Chris Murphy's comment (angry! appalled! disappointed in our siloed national discourse; believing that black women are the touchstone for our country's truth ) and the other side of me really appreciates your kinder view of our fellow americans. What else can we do but forgive and forget whomever will join in and help get us out of this national disaster. If we are not fighting for all people, we are part of the same problem we are trying to escape.
We need a Non Violent Warrior Philosophy right now. We are a country formed in violence, steeped in violence, run by violence and it is tempting to want to try to solve things with violence.
Let's dismantle the violent state if we get the chance to rebuild this country. My Libertarianism is in the area of community policing; local and quick adjudication of nonviolent crime; equitable treatment for violent crimes and restorative justice options or reparations; severely reducing the carceral state, no private prisons; denying the state any rights to kill domestically; reining in the military industrial complex; quick support in defense against aggressive actors; transparency of international aims and democratic means of determining all of the above.
We need to hold Truth as the North Star, no matter what our individual beliefs and goals. Truth is not one and done, it is a daily wrestling match, and without aspiring to a shared sense of Truth, I do not see how we can live together.
I'll add a point of clarity on my "threaten them" comment. It's not advocacy of any sort of violence. It's advocating disassociation.
Democrats spent effort claiming Trumpism is a fascist movement. OK, then why are we inviting fascists over for Thanksgiving for fuck's sake? We are sending mixed messages.
That's what I mean by threaten. Threaten to kick them to the curb. The time to have done this was before the 2016 election, it's that overdue. But certainly prior to 2024 election.
We just don't have it in us, we coddle. And that is permission. It's not polite, it's meek. And weakness leads to aggression.
We will regret it. I'm certain of that.
What should we do tonight about the CR? I live near the Capitol and I do want to physically be there to stop the Democrats from singing this piece of shit that begins the destruction of our amazing city . DC is being sacrificed .
It is so convoluted that no one can even grasp—they are taking our Local Taxes away from us. Our already paid deposits on this years schools, police, infrastructure and treating us like fodder.
Good point. They lied about Trump being a Nazi. They are really only concerned about him stepping on their grift.
I've been really interested in WHY so many people ignored the part about "rapist, felon, and vile insurrectionist." I don't think they are all voting in APPROVAL of those qualities, but have certainly come to disregard them. For that, I have contemplated how propaganda works and how the unspoken assumptions it relies on develop. This is one of my ruminations.
Years ago, when I was teaching The Left Hand of Darkness to college freshmen, I realized that there is a sense in which 1+1=3 is a true fact in the world. The equation, of course, is one man +one woman = man, woman, baby. (Well, it can also be 1+1 = 4 or 5 or even six, given multiple births).
To see this you have to shift perspectives, or terms, or definitions. You have to accept that "1" doesn't always have to be the simple start of the counting-line of integers and that = can mean "results in" in a way that math doesn't contemplate.
Since then I have mused on many occasions aboutthis shift, and its use in propaganda--first, Soviet,* and more recently, the twisting of "reality" of the increasingly reactionary right.
1+1 = 3 is a "truth" that can't be accepted without an overt explanation of the twist. The evil genius of propaganda aimed against "truths we hold to be self evident" is that it slides the shift on its hearers gradually, in baby steps, so that when it has fulfilled its intended mission, the shift has simply produced an unstated assumption the hearer can agree with on its face, without bothering to question the assumption.
We see this in the coopting of originally liberal terms and ideas into swear words or words appealing to an underlying prejudice that the hearer may not even recognize is such. Examples are woke, DEI, religious liberty, freedom/liberty in general, CRT, and most recently, "peace."
DEI provides us with a history of how this works. As far as I can tell, it was developed as an ALTERNATIVE to the harsher requirements of Affirmative Action in its full, gotta-fill-a-quota, form. The idea was to broaden the REACH of recruiting beyond the usual suspects (be it college applicants or job applicants) where the pool of applicants had previously been those who had already thought about college or KNEW about a job opening. Thus, broader advertising of job openings in jobs, active recruiting of what my university called "preferentially admitted" students--those who showed talent not reflected in grades or test stores, and who weren't included in whatever the max number of students for the freshman class was, so no one who was admitted was taking anyone's "place." ** It could simply be advertising job openings in Historically Black Colleges --or women's colleges, if such still exist-- or in other ways in predominantly minority communities
I gather (I retired before DEI became a "thing') that it also involved educating existing employees in the basics of "don't be an asshole." This was the first wedge, I think. People don't like to be told what to think, and if the education is hamfisted,*** hostility grows). From there, such hostility was compounded by myths that it included quotas or required hiring of people of less competence than other candidates. These myths arose from the widespread dislike of the quota aspects of Affirmative Action, dislike by even minorities who felt labeled as somehow by definition less competent. I also think that there was infection from the attempts to hold schools "accountable" by focusing on test scores as the definition of success. No one considers that of two people applying for a job with, say, pretty close to equal keyboarding skills, competence can also include things like the ability to get along with people, as opposed to a narcissistic personality. HR decisions aren't entirely guided by numbers, even "accurate words per minute."
The part of DEI that was most suspect was Diversity. I'm pretty sure that if you asked even the devotees of the idea that we are already a "colorblind society" that they would have to agree that "equity and inclusion" taken alone were pretty much part of "all men are create equal." But once the idea of Diversity was connected to Quota-land, the connotations migrated over to equity and inclusion; the unspoken assumption grew that those words mean something different in the context of DEI.
I'm not sure that everyone who opposes DEI under these conditions is (or was) a racist or sexist. Some just can't accept that a minority or woman could POSSIBLY be more competent than they themselvers are. Frankly, there are probably women who don't think a MAN could be more competent then they themselves are. From a personal belief, however, this broadens into a belief that no minority/woman/man could possibly be more competent that anyone in the group the believer belongs to--the rise of tribalism clearly boosts this. I do think that the attacks on DEI, by reinforcing such unspoken assumptions, is increasing the amount of racism and sexism in society, its existence hidden from those now agreeing with it.
And so the assumptions behind the concept of DEI have morphed into unspoken assumptions that turn the phrase itself into a swear word. And from THERE, the whole concept of Civil Rights itself falls under attack. Simply by using the term DEI to include basic, law-enshrined rights against discrimination in its purview, the latter are turned magically into discrimination. (After all, why would a company set up TWO separate departments for basically the same thing: the ideals of at the least equity and inclusion. That would be duplicative). I just saw that one agency has simply eliminated its Civil Rights division head/department because the title included DEI. Who is left to enforce basic Civil Rights?
One can do the same kind of analysis with the other "swear words" I've mentioned. At this point, I am most fascinated by the redefinition by Drump of the word Peace. He has slip-slid it into the infamous "Peace in Our Time" by equating it with "bowing to an aggressor and giving them the benefits of their aggression." I suspect that most people when they think about aggression on a smaller scale--the school yard bully--would agree that a school that said "yes, for purposes of playground peace you should just give up your lunch money" would be misusing the word peace.
But trump has also lit up the fears us older types have left over from the Cold war by accusing Ukraine of encouraging WWIII. Putin threatens nuclear arms in overcoming Ukraine, but as a practical matter taking over its resources for Russian use would be rather hampered by huge areas of long term radiation. I'm not sure what direction the prevailing winds are in various parts of Ukraine, but Putin MUST realize that even his supporters would not like fallout over their dachas. Putin is a tyrant, but he is a consistent tyrant, not the nutso one we have currently trying to blast our democracy and our very way of privileged life by non-nuclear means. Whatever bad things are involved in Putin's own personality, I rather think totally "uninformed" isn't included.
And thus we get to the real danger of building a narrative based on unspoken and illegitimate assumptions--what happens when the propagandists believe their own propaganda? What happens when the "socially constructed reality" which they so decry but use to control the masses becomes THEIR reality? What happens when the equation becomes 1+1 = 0: people (1) and government (1) becoming total anarchy.
We are living that question right now.
_________________________________________________________
*back in the day we actually got TAUGHT the techniques of propaganda, though the examples were always Soviet.
**(I taught English to students in one such program: it was a tremendous experience of how "brightness" doesn't equal formal education, and apparently successful in mainstreaming kids--by no means not all minorities--into a college education. I ran into one of my students much later, a kid who had no idea what a sentence was. He had just graduated in architecture and was heading to grad school).
*** Hamfisted could also involve the hiring process where some in HR also thought they were obliged to give PREFERENCE to minority/female applicants in patently unfair ways. Neither form of hamfisting is part of the INTENT of DEI.
We're heading for chaos, not anarchy.
A persistent friction exists between the order demanded by the Constitution, and the Trump branded patrimonial style of government presently operating. Like the underlying cause for earthquakes, the pressure is building.
The arbitrary, capricious, brutal, adversarial and incompetent nature of Trumpism makes its collapse inevitable.
I am not quite as pessimistic as Brock, though. There's a path by which the states can provide the necessary stability. The states have their own executives and legislatures. They are themselves republics, empires of laws not of men. They are not Donald's play things to do with as he wishes. If he is the unitary executive, it is of the federal government alone. This is yet another example of American polyarchy, and ambition to counter ambition.
Three-fourths of the states, given sufficient duress and compromise, can "reboot" the federal government without any federal government involvement. Anything three quarters of the states can agree upon is possible.
The fact the federal institutions are weak is to our benefit. We're not supposed to be looking for heroes to save us. We're supposed to be the heroes. We the people. Or perhaps hero worship is passe? Fine then. We fucked it up. And it is up to us, alone, to unfuck it.
The election of an anti-Constitution president is not consent to sweep away the constitutional republic. The law is paramount. States will persist through the chaos, and to whatever degree the federal government is in abeyance, it will be restored. No one gave consent, let alone three-quarters of us, to set aside the Constitution just because we elected Fuckface von Clownstick as POTUS again.
The propaganda of the Democratic party is that everything is normal, should remain normal. That sitting in silence, doing nothing while Al Green shows a way to resist, while Trump attacks Elizabeth Warren, while decorum is continuously breached. It's obscenely pathetic that the Democratic party engages in their own brand of normalizing this deviancy. This is also propaganda. There's nothing normal about what's going on.
I’m not sure you can make blanket statements about the Democratic party and “normalcy.” Some seem to be too timid, but not all. My Senator Patty Murray didn’t go at all. I do wish more had walked out after the expulsion of Green, perhaps returning to the back with signs that said “why didn’t Pelosi expel MTG and Boebutt.” I’m not sure that there are many DEMOCRAT, as opposed to party reps and leaders, who think any of this is normal.
WaPo, despite all the condemnation of Bezos, had a pretty telling private poll (not a very scientific ones, but still) on who exactly “approves” of trump, his diatribe, or any of his particular policies. Other sources show that the “approval” of the speech was partly because older GOP folks were the main people actually watching it. I DO wonder what the 7% of Harris voters polled who approve how Dump is handling the economy are thinking. Perhaps they just lied about who they voted for.
Not sure I see a lot of difference, in the context of a government, between chaos and anarchy. I agree about the role the states can play and that they can persist through chaos. But my own sense is that— before I can shuffle off my mortal coil, shortly before the projected inability of Social Security to PAY— that blue states will be conjoined with Canada, if not their own nation. (Geographically, conjoined makes more sense: otherwise there are Idaho, Montana, and the Dakotas between Cascadia and the next over blue place.
I agree btw, with prognosticators that Forces of Musk can destroy Social Security for those still unable to take it. Just making it impossible to APPLY will do that. It will be harder to take it away from those already getting it. There IS that pesky statute that would need voiding, and neither Musk nor trump can really do that, even if Clarence and Alito think they should be able to.
O have no idea what you are talking about.
thanks for yet another great piece - amazing writing
Do you suggest that the unaccountable administrative state is a democratic form?
Do you suggest that the courts intervening on behalf of the unaccountable administrative state against an elected Executive is a democratic form?
Excellent observation about the weightlessness that occurs when the upward momentum of a political situation encounters the gravity of reality. It is increasingly apparent that the country cannot continue with Trump unrestrained and caught up in full-blown narcissism. What's next? J.D. Vance is politically accident-prone and almost equally unfit for office. Mike Johnson is practically a spinning dervish, constantly trying to figure out which way the wind is blowing so he knows when to duck. Hardly a leader. That leaves Marco Rubio.
🌊🖤
"I counter the current now
It’s destined to turn somehow
I watch as it flows backwards to me"
Spiritbox - A Haven With Two Faces
https://youtu.be/5iAxY26Kkqk?si=lqfsGRRWWHehZm0s
Love it
Exactly what I have been saying for so long. But people don't want to hear it or aren't ready. MAGA voters are demonized and labelled and put in a box of standing for everything Trump does. I abhor all it stands for, however I believe it was driven by economics. Not just the recent inflation, although that may have been the inflection point, but the economic insecurity of such a large number of people. They needed solutions, were promised them, and never saw them. I believe they need to see, and unfortunately now experience the pain of making the wrong choice to understand Trump is not the solution.
If we are going to get out of this, they need to realize what the real obstacle is to their struggles and we all need to be united after so much effort has been made to divide us.
We've been living through the Curse of Knowledge. Hopefully we are entering the a time when we all start to actually agree on our needs and who the true culprits are. Maybe we are beginning to, but don't realize it yet.. There seems to be non-partisan unhappiness with what is happening. This is a key ingredient if we have any chance to turn this around
Look at the bright side, it's not like it would have ended up any better if the donkeys were still in charge.
I can't believe you just wrote that.
Gross.
They did not vote for dignity. They voted for a rapist, a felon, and a vile insurrectionist.
And we were unable or unwilling to persuade them or even threaten them when it could have mattered.
You're welcome to just leave it at that.
But instead you paint a picture of pathetic, gullible morons who should be papered over as something they aren't. It's the same coddling, forgiveness in advance, invite them to the usual social gatherings that all of them saw as permission.
Desperate?
Black women, to pick a single demographic that exemplifies the working class, did not get duped by this bullshit.
By all means make the case it's mass hysteria, brainwashing, addiction to depravity, collective narcissism, delusional - something that explains how this happened in terms that permits accountability and rehabilitation.
But to say they voted for dignity? It's utter bullshit. In no universe were people who voted for a complete piece of shit (always has been, always will be) voting for dignity. For anybody.
Say they're insane. And you hope we find a cure.
But don't peddle bullshit. That will make matters much worse.
see my own comment, posted just after yours.
True, sleepwalking into tyranny. There are those in the democratic party that are so completely tied to the party that they remain optimistic that they are plow horse with blinders. They may see where they want to head but cannot see the periphery where the potentially irreversible damage is taking place.