You remind me of something I caught on television soon after the Trump
campaign got underway. Right now my vocabulary is failing me and the
word for this won't come to mind. It was one of those things where bits
and pieces of sound bites are strung together to make something like an
audio collage. Drat! Why can't I think of the name of that? Anyway, one
person after another was praising Trump for about two to three seconds
until the next one came along. But one of those snippits stood out to
me. He sounded like a preacher. He said, "Vote for Jesus! Vote for Trump!"
On 9/6/2018 5:08 PM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
I wish I had more time to really read this article in depth, but life
is spinning out of control lately in the Jarvis Reality. With Cathy's
sister out of town, we check in with her mother every day. It's about
an hour and fifteen minutes each way to the nursing home. About two
hours visit. So minimum of 4.5 hours each day. We've kept our client
schedule to mornings, as much as possible, but that is another 3 to 4
hours on the days we have clients. Of course there are the usual
tasks, the horses, the job of dog sitting while Cathy's sister is out
of town, finding someone to try and figure out why, after 24 years,
our water tank is drawing up gray water, etc.
But this author reminds me of all the reasons I continue to believe
that our invention of God is the root of our troubles. And while no
one would defend the idea that Donald Trump is anywhere near to being
a God, neither were any of the previous dictators down through
history. But it didn't stop them from forcing the people to believe
it.
And now some of the Republican "moderates" are trying to steer Donald
Trump. They want the changes Trump's people are setting in motion,
but they are just a little bit nervous when it comes to their
"leader". Ah yes my little ones. Gather round and I'll tell you a bed
time tale about a funny looking little man with a funny mustache and a
hatred for Jews.
Carl Jarvis
On 9/6/18, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Creeping Fascism No Problem for Trump’s Durable Base
President Trump at an Aug. 30 rally in Evansville, Ind. (Evan Vucci / AP)
How, liberals and progressives ask with shocked amazement, can President
Trump’s supporters continue to back him? They persist even as one piece of
evidence after another emerges of his epic and pathological gaslighting, his
shameless immorality, his abject criminality, his wild stupidity and his
corruption. Then there’s his chilling authoritarianism, his tendency toward
fascism, his ugly sexism, his textbook malignant narcissism and his nasty
racism.
These flummoxed observers aren’t wrong about Donald “Don’t Believe What You
See and Hear” Trump’s terrible, duplicitous and unabashedly Orwellian
nature, but their incredulity is naive.
Yes, the evidence is clear as day—to people who pay serious attention to
evidence. Nine of every 10 Americans—and certainly a larger share of
Republicans and Trump backers—believe in the existence of God. Ask most
Americans what exactly one is supposed to believe in when it comes to “God,”
and they will say little or nothing in the way of empirical proof. It’s
never quite clear what the concept and word mean. It’s about faith, not
evidence.
Evidence is easily devalued in a faith-based nation in which magical
thinking (a critical component of authoritarianism and hardly limited to
religious and metaphysical matters) is rife.
“Cognitive dissonance,” a mental pattern first identified by the
psychologist Leon Festinger, doesn’t help. People confronted with evidence
that contradicts their convictions don’t typically correct their beliefs,
Festinger found. Instead, they more commonly double down on their mistaken
idea rather than face the mental and egoic pain associated with admitting
erroneous thinking. The more they have invested in and even lost from false
beliefs, the more they will respond to contrary evidence by actually
intensifying their attachment to those untrue notions. (This may help
explain how Trump often seems to gain support after talking heads, reporters
and politicos call him out for saying or tweeting something particularly
absurd.)
Right-wing media worsens the problem. A potent network of counterfactual
white Republican news and opinion outlets regularly amplify and reinforce
fact-trumping feelings and cognitively dissonant reactions. Watch Fox News
and listen to noxiously racist, nationalist and neo-McCarthyite talk-radio
hate-mongers like Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin. Nothing is clear as day
across the soulless landscape of radically conservative media, where 2+2=5;
war is peace; love is hate; corporate Democrats are Marxists; antifa is a
giant mass movement created by the Democratic Party; black football players
who take knees during the national anthem are traitors; the billionaire
rentier Donald Trump is a friend of the working man; anthropogenic global
warming is a “hoax”; and “God” wants us to burn every last fossil fuel on
earth. As Trump’s wacky post-modernist lawyer Rudolph Giuliani put it
recently, “truth isn’t truth.”
Feelings trump facts all the time in the U.S. This is true on both sides of
the major-party aisle. Talking in 2007 and 2008 to highly educated
campus-town liberal Democrats, including plenty of doctorate holders and
religious skeptics, I consistently found that facts were of little use in
trying to dent their deeply entrenched and utterly false view that Barack
Obama was a people’s champion of peace, democracy and social justice. To
paraphrase the Beatles, they had “a feeling [about Obama]–a feeling deep
inside, oh yeah.”
The so-called mainstream liberal media is itself no great champion of truth.
It perversely purveyed George W. Bush’s Orwellian nonsense about Iraq’s
supposed “weapons of mass destruction.” As I was first writing this
paragraph (last Friday), moreover, Trump’s cable-news bêtes noires CNN and
MSNBC were immersed in a seemingly endless and totally absurd
memorialization of the war criminal, lifelong imperial war hawk and
corporate neoliberal John McCain as a Christ-like embodiment of transcendent
human decency.
There’s also the selective and partisan use and interpretation of evidence.
Trumpsters know some facts very well. Tell them their president lies, cheats
and commits crimes, and some of them will remind you that Bill Clinton,
Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have done the same. They’re right about
that (Obama’s apparent observance of his marriage vows notwithstanding),
even if they often get their facts wrong on how and why those corporate
Democrats (absurdly seen as Left by Republicans) transgressed. And it’s
never clear how the readily documentable fact that Democrats do nasty things
makes Trump’s epic awfulness any less awful.
Trump’s backers also cite undeniable facts of economic expansion, the stock
market explosion and a falling official unemployment rate during Trump’s
anti-presidency. But Trump boosters leave out and often deny the fact that
the expansion started under Obama. They ignore the considerable downsides of
the Obama-Trump “boom”: over-stagnant wages, savage economic and related
racial inequality, environmental destruction, massive public and private
debt, the over-concentration of stock ownership and profits in the hands of
a small minority, and the reckless overvaluation of stocks and other
financial assets—harbingers of a coming crash encouraged by Trump’s heedless
deregulation of finance.
Trump backers seem to think the U.S. capitalist economy is micromanaged in
the Oval Office, as if Trump—who can’t even read a basic balance sheet—is
personally responsible for the business cycle he’s been fortunate to ride.
That’s a pretty stupid thing to believe.
Speaking of stupidity, what about Trump’s real or alleged idiocy? The
“mentally deranged dotard” (North Korean leader Kim Jong Un’s colorful
description of Trump last summer) would probably outscore George W. Bush
(more on that dolt below) but come in below the Clintons and Obama on
standard intelligence measures. Whatever his brainpower, however, Trump is
an inexhaustible font of fatuous and inane political assertion. Take, as one
example, his frequent go-to: climate change denial. Then there’s his claim
that thousands of Muslims danced on the roofs of apartment complexes
watching the World Trade Center towers collapse on 9/11, as well as the
ridiculous assertion the U.S. is being flooded by immigrant rapists and
murderers.
These would also make the list: the preposterous charge Trump was denied a
popular victory over Hillary Clinton by immigrant voter fraud; the ludicrous
allegation Google has “rigged” its search engine against him, and the
wild-eyed contention that a small leftist anti-fascist group (antifa) will
drown the nation in violence if Democrats take over Congress in the 2018
midterm elections. Finally, there’s Trump’s openly and insanely false claim
that NBC doctored (“fudged”) an interview he did with Lester Holt in May of
2017—an interview in which he clearly tells Holt that he fired FBI Director
James Comey because Comey was investigating the president’s connections to
Russia. Every day seems to bring a new ludicrous and patently false tweet or
comment from “President Dunce Cap.”
Sadly enough, however, stupidity is not necessarily a big problem for much
of the population. Ten years ago, historian Rick Shenkman wrote a book
titled “Just How Stupid Are We? Facing the Truth About the American Voter.”
The book was filled with depressing statistics like the following:
● A majority of Americans didn’t know which party was in control of
Congress.
● A majority couldn’t name the chief justice of the Supreme Court.
● A majority didn’t know the U.S. had three branches of government.
● A majority of Americans told pollsters in 2003 they believed George W.
Bush’s argument the United States should invade Iraq because Saddam Hussein
had attacked America on 9/11.
George W. “Is Our Kids Learning?” Bush, Number 43, was an abject moron who
thought “God” wanted him to invade Iraq. The depressing fact that a majority
of Americans believed Dubya’s bold-faced lie about Saddam Hussein’s
culpability in the 2001 jetliner attacks on U.S. soil was striking evidence
for Shenkman’s assertion that “ignorance of basic facts” reflects a “level
of inattentiveness that is unhealthy in a society that purports to be free
and democratic.”
The problem didn’t go away just because the electorate responded to the Iraq
fiasco and the meltdown of the economy by putting enough of its longstanding
racism aside to place a former editor of the Harvard Law Review—an epitome
of the professional class’ education-based meritocratic worldview who
happened to be black—in the White House for eight years. The silver-tongued
and deeply conservative Ivy League creation and arch-neoliberal imperialist
Obama did facts and truth no favors by pretending to be something he
wasn’t—a progressive friend of social justice, democracy and peace—while he
dutifully helped preserve Wall Street’s control of the nation’s domestic and
foreign policies. (Orwell noted that form of pretense, too.)
Reflecting on the Trump phenomenon in early 2016, Shenkman recognized the
underlying U.S.-American disease of mass stupidity (though in truth the real
problem he was discussing was ignorance) was alive and well in Obama’s final
year:
“
[M]illions of [U.S.] people take sheer nonsense seriously. Their ignorance
is making them sitting ducks for politicians like Donald ‘I love the poorly
educated’ Trump. Election 2016 is turning into a civics teacher’s case study
from hell. … From the moment he rode down the escalator at Trump Tower …
Trump has been offering simplistic solutions. … Each proposal has been
eviscerated in the media based on the critiques of experts who have pointed
out that his proposed solutions barely withstand cursory analysis. … But his
voters haven’t cared. Nor have they worried when the media have caught him
in one lie after another. Politifact has called him out for lying more than
any of the other candidates, but to little effect. … It appears he can get
away with saying anything.
The rest, as they say, is history. With no small help from the horrific and
uninspiring candidacy of the ultimate establishment politico Hillary Clinton
(Yale Law, one notch above Harvard Law), the Orwellian falsehood machine and
lower-brain atavist Trump swept the Electoral College. The president has
continued his relentless war on reality with a remarkably durable approval
rate in the low to mid-40s, largely undented even by his former longtime
lawyer Michael Cohen’s recent identification of Trump as a co-conspirator in
the illegal payment of funds for the purpose of silencing two women with
whom Trump had had extramarital affairs.
What about Trump’s authoritarianism? It is evident in his cold disregard for
the rule of law and the power of Congress and his Cabinet, as well as his
recurrent habit of praising strongman leaders around the world.
Most liberals and progressives I know are stunned that Trump’s clear
despotism and taste for tyranny do not bother his base. But there’s no basis
for their astonishment about this. Leaving aside the fact Trump is more
showman than strongman, nobody who pays serious attention to the relevant
survey data should think that the president’s authoritarian inclinations
would be a problem for his supporters.
In December 2015, the political scientist Matthew MacWilliams surveyed 1,800
registered voters across the country and the political spectrum. Employing
standard statistical survey analysis, McMillan found education, income,
gender and age had no significant bearing on a Republican voter’s preferred
candidate. “Only two of the variables I looked at,” MacWilliams reported in
January of 2016, “were statistically significant: authoritarianism, followed
by fear of terrorism, though the former was far more significant than the
latter.” Trump, MacWilliams found, was the only candidate in either party
with statistically significant support from authoritarians. “Those who say a
Trump presidency ‘can’t happen here,’ ” MacWilliams wrote in Politico,
“should check their conventional wisdom at the door. … Conditions are ripe
for an authoritarian leader to emerge. Trump is seizing the opportunity.”
A year and a half later, a poll conducted by political scientists Ariel
Malka and Yphtach Lelkes found that 56 percent of Republicans support
postponing the 2020 presidential election if Trump and congressional
Republicans advocate this to “make sure that only eligible American citizens
can vote.”
This brings us to Trump’s racism, evident from numerous statements of his
before and during his presidency. Is it a problem for Trump backers?
Know any other good jokes? Trump’s disproportionately Caucasian base is
fused by an embattled white racial identity. This Trumpian “make America
white again” heart- and mind-set holds that whites are becoming a minority
targeted by discrimination and “politically correct” liberal and leftists
have been turning the nation’s politics and policies against white values,
culture, needs, rights and prerogatives. This curious “reverse
discrimination” victim whiteness (devoid of evidence for its claims) informs
the Trump base’s understanding of the meaning of the word “corruption” in
ways the liberal writer Peter Beinart recently captured in the Atlantic. For
Trump’s base, Beinart writes, the idea of corruption isn’t so much about
politics and the law as it is about racial and gender purity:
“
Trump supporters appear largely unfazed by the mounting evidence that Trump
is the least ethical president in modern American history. … Once you grasp
that for Trump and many of his supporters, corruption means less the
violation of law than the violation of established hierarchies [of race and
gender], their behavior makes more sense. … Why were Trump’s supporters so
convinced that [Hillary] Clinton was the more corrupt candidate even as
reporters uncovered far more damning evidence about Trump’s foundation than
they did about Clinton’s? Likely because Clinton’s candidacy threatened
traditional gender roles. For many Americans, female ambition—especially in
service of a feminist agenda—in and of itself represents a form of
corruption.
Cohen’s admission makes it harder for Republicans to claim that Trump didn’t
violate the law. But it doesn’t really matter. For many Republicans, Trump
remains uncorrupt—indeed, anti-corrupt—because what they fear most isn’t the
corruption of American law; it’s the corruption of America’s traditional
identity. And in the struggle against that form of corruption—the kind
embodied by Cristhian Rivera [the “illegal immigrant” accused of murdering
the young white woman Mollie Tibbetts in rural Iowa two weeks ago]—Trump
isn’t the problem. He’s the solution. [Emphasis added.]
But, of course, it’s not about racism, nativism, sexism or authoritarianism
when it comes to understanding Trump’s base. White racial and gender
identity and authoritarianism have long merged with and cross-fertilized
each other. Last May, political scientists Steven V. Miller and Nicholas T.
Davis released a working paper titled “White Outgroup Intolerance and
Declining Support for American Democracy.” Their study found a strong
correlation between white Americans’ racial intolerance and support for
authoritarian rule. “When racially intolerant white people fear democracy
may benefit marginalized people of color,” NBC News reported, citing the
Miller and Davis paper, “they abandon their commitment to democracy.”
The Trump base’s bigotry and its leanings toward authoritarianism are not
separate problems. They are inseparably linked. When Trump calls Mexicans
murderers and rapists, when he rails about the need for building a wall,
when he denounces the media as “fake news,” when he disses judges and the
rule of law and juries, and when he praises authoritarian leaders, he is
appealing to the same voters.
The most sophisticated and statistically astute analysis of the 2016 Trump
electorate produced so far has been crafted by political sociologists David
Norman Smith and Eric Hanley. In an article published in Critical Sociology
last March, Smith and Hanley found the white Trump base was differentiated
from white non-Trump voters not by class or other “demographic” factors
(including income, age, gender and the alleged class identifier of
education) but by eight key attitudes and values: identification as
“conservative”; support for “domineering leaders”; Christian fundamentalism;
prejudice against immigrants; prejudice against blacks; prejudice against
Muslims; prejudice against women, and a sense of pessimism about the
economy.
Strong Trump supporters scored particularly high on support for domineering
leaders, fundamentalism, opposition to immigrants and economic pessimism.
They were particularly prone to support authoritarian leaders who promised
to respond punitively to minorities perceived as
“line-cutters”—“undeserving” others who were allegedly getting ahead of
traditional white Americans in the procurement of jobs and government
benefits—and to the supposed liberal “rotten apples” who were purportedly
allowing these “line-cutters” to advance ahead of traditional white American
males.
Support for politically authoritarian leaders and a sense of intolerance
regarding racial, ethnic and gender differences are two sides of the same
Trumpian coin. The basic desire animating Trump’s base was “the defiant wish
for a domineering and impolitic leader” linked to “the wish for a reversal
of what his base perceives as an inverted moral and racial order.”
Is Trump’s narcissism a problem for his backers? Not really. As psychologist
Elizabeth Mika noted last year in an essay titled “Who Goes Trump? Tyranny
as a Triumph of Narcissism”:
“
The tyrant’s narcissism is the main attractor to his followers, who project
their hopes and dreams. The more grandiose his own sense of self and his
promises to his fans, the greater their attraction and the stronger their
support. … Through the process of identification, the tyrant’s followers
absorb his omnipotence and glory and imagine themselves winners in the game
of life. This identification heals the followers’ narcissistic wounds, but
also tends to shut down their reason and conscience.
If that sounds anything like “creeping fascism,” that’s because it is. As
political scientist Anthony DiMaggio recently observed:
“
There are too many red flags in public sentiment to ignore the threat of
creeping fascism. Ominously, one of the strongest statistical predictors of
support for Trump is the desire for a strong leader who will ‘crush evil’
and ‘get rid of the rotten apples’ who ‘disturb the status quo.’ Half of
Republicans say they trust Donald Trump as a more reliable source of
information than the news media—more reliable even than conservative media
outlets. Nearly half of Republicans think media outlets should be ‘shut
down’ if they are ‘broadcasting stories that are biased or inaccurate,’
raising ominous possibilities regarding precisely who will act on such
allegations. … The cult of Trump is not an abstract phenomenon, but one that
has real implications. … The danger of fascist creep is also seen in the
support from most Republican Americans for shutting down the 2020 election,
so long as Trump declares it necessary to combat fictitious voter fraud.
Conservatives’ acceptance of this conspiracy theory continues,
unfortunately, despite the president’s own ‘voter fraud commission’ being
disbanded after failing to find any evidence of it.
Is Trump’s “creeping fascism” a problem for his backers? Leaving aside the
interesting debate among liberal and left commentators about whether Trump
is a real or creeping fascist, it is unlikely that more than a small number
of Americans could provide even the remotest outlines of a working
definition of what classic European fascism was or what fascism more broadly
defined is in the world today. It’s hard for people to reject something they
know little or nothing about regarding its existence and nature (even as
they are thinking and acting in accord with some of the phenomenon’s key
characteristics).
As the dangerously declining superpower that is the United States moves at
an accelerating pace, under Trump, into a period that deserves to be called
at least pre-fascism, it is an even better time than usual to heed George
Santyana’s warning: “Those who cannot learn from the past are doomed to
repeat it.”
Paul Street
