Trump - Clown Genius

[Ego]

Meh, it's 110% clear we're just talking past each other at this point. What I've been saying is something said in retrospect. I'm not deflecting your criticism of me, I'm ignoring it because it is unfounded. Like I said, sorry to have started the discussion by including you.

This response perfectly displays the Catch-22 inherent in your criticism of what you say is the reason Trump won.

You say dialog is the answer but then will only tolerate dialog that you are comfortable with. You say, "Meh, it's 110% clear we're just talking past each other," then in the very next breath say you have repeatedly ignored the points I've made.

Several of us here have been pretty clear that we believe the Trump supporters who are angry about their current reality need to change, adapt, and evolve if they want to be successful in a fast-changing world. Trump supporters don't want to hear that message. They don't want to talk. They say, meh, then ignore it and vote for someone who has promised to crash the bus for the fun of it.

What if there is nothing anyone can say to help them? What if no amount of conversation will fix things for them? What then?

[Dragline]

Much as I despise such racism, I am not sure if pushing it in the closet is the best thing to do. Lots of nasty things lurk in the dark. Shining light on them may be better. At least she now knows who her neighbor really is. He was no different yesterday, but then it was a secret.

I don't know. Emotions and behaviors, both good and bad, can be contagious. Demanding that he push them into the closet forces him to keep them them to himself. That way he can't infect others. Allowing him to let them run wild gives others permission to do the same. '

It's like driving 65 mph on the highway when everyone else is driving 80. It takes effort to resist conforming to the norm. Without thinking, people who would never drive over the speed limit find themselves unknowingly going 80.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_contagion.

I think its even older and broader than that (and is mimetic and sub-rational in origin). If you've ever read Plutarch's Lives (not that I am expecting too many takers on that), he describes how ancient Roman societies used the penalty of "proscription" to rid society of those deemed undesirable. The way it worked was the ruler would identify people who were "proscribed", which meant that they were essentially outside the protection of the law and that they were to be hunted down and murdered by whomever wanted to participate. You could steal their possessions, too, and maybe kill their family. And they had no trouble getting people to participate.

In the late middle ages and up even into the 18th Century in Europe, assembling crowds to go after suspected witches was all the rage. (A lot of this is chronicled in Charles MacKay's 1841 masterpiece, "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds".)

In the US, the tradition has been for the government to give tacit or unspoken permission in the form of an understanding that it would not do anything to help certain people if you assembled a group and went after them. The history is really ugly with traditions of KKK lynchings and things like the Rosewood Massacre of 1923 and the "Zoot Suit" Riots of 1943. The US version also relies heavily on symbols that can convey a tacit understanding but also provide plausible deniability. Where the symbols are tolerated and widespread, the behavior is tacitly accepted.

I believe this is why the KKK is having a large celebration for the outcome of this election with a victory parade in North Carolina. It IS a victory for them. They are not looking for or expecting a government or a population that necessarily supports their views -- just one that will tacitly look the other way.

[IlliniDave]

You say dialog is the answer but then will only tolerate dialog that you are comfortable with. You say, "Meh, it's 110% clear we're just talking past each other," then in the very next breath say you have repeatedly ignored the points I've made.

Several of us here have been pretty clear that we believe the Trump supporters who are angry about their current reality need to change, adapt, and evolve if they want to be successful in a fast-changing world. Trump supporters don't want to hear that message. They don't want to talk. They say, meh, then ignore it and vote for someone who has promised to crash the bus for the fun of it.

This is sort of it. I'm not a Trump supporter. Never was one. So when you criticize me for being a Trump supporter of course I ignore it. And the fact that after repeatedly making it clear I am not a Trump supporter, you refuse to acknowledge it, and continue to direct criticisms of Trump supporters towards me is why I say we're talking past each other. If you want to rage against Trump and his supporters that's fine. But I'm not one and I don't have any interest in doing that, nor in defending them nor arguing their positions. Sorry.

If you had wanted to have a conversation with a political moderate that voted independent, and has voted both Democratic and Republican in the past, we could have had one maybe. But I'm weary of the leftist broad brush jobs.

[Ego]

To those around the world who feel sorry for us. Don't. It would have been worse with HRC and we're a pretty resilient bunch over here.

Oh, you've made it perfectly clear that you did not vote for Trump. I am speaking to the person who proclaims proudly that he is happier with Trump than he would have been with Hillary. I have a feeling you might change your mind on that opinion soon enough.

[RealPerson]

In the US, the tradition has been for the government to give tacit or unspoken permission in the form of an understanding that it would not do anything to help certain people if you assembled a group and went after them. The history is really ugly with traditions of KKK lynchings and things like the Rosewood Massacre of 1923 and the "Zoot Suit" Riots of 1943. The US version also relies heavily on symbols that can convey a tacit understanding but also provide plausible deniability. Where the symbols are tolerated and widespread, the behavior is tacitly accepted.

I believe this is why the KKK is having a large celebration for the outcome of this election with a victory parade in North Carolina. It IS a victory for them. They are not looking for or expecting a government or a population that necessarily supports their views -- just one that will tacitly look the other way.

If your analysis of the situation is correct, we are in for a terribly rough time. Fortunately, there are midterm elections in 2 years. The system in the US has a lot of checks and balances.

Dragline, I know you are well read and a logical thinker, but I truly hope you are wrong on this one. What widespread symbols are you referring to in the current context?

[BRUTE]

What if there is nothing anyone can say to help them? What if no amount of conversation will fix things for them? What then?

put them in some type of camp maybe?

[Dragline]

There is an extensive database here: http://www.adl.org/combating-hate/hate- ... CjlwVIzU5s

Most common used in the US are still Confederate flags and Celtic or blood crosses, as they can easily explained away as "historical" or "heritage" symbols. Swastikas are still popular as graffitti/vandalism. Pepe the Frog is likely to be used by a younger, internet savvy person.

The phrase "Trump Nation" has been appearing since the election and was used last night to deface a church near where I live that caters to a largely Hispanic congregation. I expect this one to become quite popular, actually, due to the plausible deniability of its racist intent. "Whites only" often appears somewhere near it, though.

[GandK]

This. This sums it up.

How Half Of America Lost Its F**king Mind

[bryan]

This. This sums it up.

How Half Of America Lost Its F**king Mind

Interesting (and ironic) how the disenfranchised, white rurals voted Trump in the primaries; granted the primaries had pretty shit choices (would this year have been Ron Paul's year?).

[Ego]

Jenny, you should be ashamed.

The team he is assembling? I am flabbergasted that you would bring it up....

Sarah Palin is on the shortlist for Secretary of the Interior. Four evolution deniers for Heath and Human Services. Brute joked about camps. No joke. Joe Arpaio shortlist for the head of Homeland Security. Yes, that Joe Arpaio. Who else?

I've deleted the rest. You should be ashamed.

[GandK]

I'm tired of the shaming BS. (Here, of all places!)

Look, you want to discuss the merits, or lack thereof, of a specific position? By all means, let's have a reasoned discourse. You want to shift the focus from the points to the person making them?

No.

Do not infect what is quite possibly the last gentle, reasonable corner of the Internet with the sort of behavior that discourages respectful debate.

[Ego]

In other words, you want a safe space.

Jenny deleted her entire post, making it look as if I picked on her out of the blue.

[GandK]

In other words, you want a safe space.

Jenny deleted her post making it look as if I picked on her.

Right. It couldn't possibly be that someone who obsesses over words for a living thought maybe she could express herself better in another way or at a different time.

[IlliniDave]

To those around the world who feel sorry for us. Don't. It would have been worse with HRC and we're a pretty resilient bunch over here.

Oh, you've made it perfectly clear that you did not vote for Trump. I am speaking to the person who proclaims proudly that he is happier with Trump than he would have been with Hillary. I have a feeling you might change your mind on that opinion soon enough.

LOL. That's a pretty long stretch making that into a proud proclamation of being happier with Trump than Clinton. It is a proud proclamation that I intend to survive a big bite of a $hit sandwich, as I believe the country will. And in the battle of evils, I do suspect Trump is the lesser when I look at the long game. It could be I'm misguessing in that. We'll see when the 2020 election rolls around.

[Ego]

Right. It couldn't possibly be that someone who obsesses over words for a living thought maybe she could express herself better in another way or at a different time.

Let me rephrase that. Jenny deleted the post to which I responded. It then appeared that I was picking on her out of the blue. She did not delete it to create the appearance.

[bryan]

few songs for a possible soundtrack:
Willie Dunn - I Pity the Country (1973)
Roger Miller - Where Have All The Average People Gone
Casket Girls - Tears of a Clown
BEC SANDRIDGE - You're A Fucking Joke
Lord Huron - The World Ender

[BRUTE]

Ego can feel free to continue shaming brute, as brute enjoys offensive arguments much more than jennypenny does (apparently).

frankly, brute thinks that shaming can turn into fascism, and it's often a fine line and a matter of perspective.

while Ego seems to be thinking "zomg how can these humans legitimize Trump, that's unacceptable", other humans are under the impression that a lack of enthusiasm about Hillary doesn't equate to condoning aforementioned shaming of a nice Hispanic lady by a racist white asshole or shooting unarmed black guys.

in a way, these are just competing world views - if both sides escalate all the way and take arguments to the extreme, the other side must be annihilated. every last Trump defender must be eliminated for the world to be safe for {muslims, trans humans, gays}. every last Liberal must be eliminated for the world to be safe for {conservatives, christians, apple pie, gun lovers}.

brute somewhat dislikes this line of thinking because it almost always leads to extreme splintering, division, and hatefulness among humans that otherwise get along fine. i.e. jennypenny, as the somewhat conservative voice on this forum.

brute could shame Ego for supporting taxation, which is literally illegitimate armed robbery, or supporting Clinton, who is literally married to a war criminal and serial rapist, and likely murdered children in Waco herself, and committed treason by interfering with her party electing Bernie, or supporting a government that has waged aggressive wars against helpless nations under false pretense, or a president that has murdered American citizens without due process (yes, Obama).

but brute doesn't, because brute doesn't really care that much and would just rather fight with Ego about the value of fiber in the diet than about who needs to be annihilated.

[7Wannabe5]

This world and the people in it are so much more interesting than the framework of the current divisions. One of the individuals in my social circle who voted for Trump is an old wealthy white guy who adopted the African-American daughter of his long-time girlfriend. His primary concern was that Hillary was likely to increase the inheritance tax, and thereby limit his ability to transfer his wealth to his adopted daughter. Just yesterday I met an 87 year old man who voted for Trump because he was a member of the American Communist Party in his youth, and the current practices of the Democratic party reminded him of the factors that led to his disenchantment with the Communists. He said something like "Their strategy is to first separate the men from the women, and then they take control of the children."

[llorona]

Signs made by a Latino family at a peaceful demonstration in Oakland, California today. Thousands of people came together and joined hands, creating a human chain around the 3.5-mile lake.

[Ego]

Brute, you mentioned camps which reminded me that Joe Arpaio created what he called concentration camps in the 120 degree desert not far from here. I went looking and found that the same Joe Arpaio is going to get a position in the Trump administration. Maybe even.... get this.... head of Homeland Security. A man who created concentration camps. And was proud of it. Concentration camps. How else can I say those words so that the gravity sinks in with everyone here?

So, thank you for reminding me of it. No shame intended. If it came across that way, I apologize. As you can imagine, I feel strongly about concentration camps and haven't been terribly precise with my writing.