Monday, November 14, 2016

How should the left respond?

It's been interesting how passionate the Facebook posts have been since the election results were finalized--even on this side of the border.  Passionate may be just a euphemism for outraged, hateful, threatening, but if you are someone who feels this is the end of civilization as you've known it, maybe this is a natural reaction.

But, a few thoughts.  Yes, Trump is horrible.  Yes, it's shocking how many people voted for him despite... fill in your litany of awfulness.  Still, are hateful rants going to open up a dialogue with the people you want to change?  Who's going to listen to your point of view if it's couched in profanity-filled abuse directed at them?  This ain't how dialogue happens.

Second, the ongoing protests against the results.  Makes sense; he's not the choice of many of the city voters, and they can more easily organize and take to the streets.  But there is a danger in how we approach this as we teach our children the correct response when democracy doesn't go our way.

Is the message "Be outraged and make sure he and those making decisions in the next administration know you'll be watching their actions and standing up for those most threatened?"  That's your right and hopefully the message gets through.

But if it's "We don't accept this election and we're going to keep marching and maybe eventually rioting to show our anger and denial of the outcome of the voting process", then that's problematic.  Because historically, that's what totalitarian dictators and their supporters do when they begin usurping power without the legitimacy of a mandate from the people.  It's not different just because you think you have the moral high ground.

Trump muttered about not accepting the results of what he warned would be a "rigged" election--covering himself in case he lost so he could save face and stir up as much crap among his supporters as possible.  It would be interesting to see how that might have looked and what his supporters would be doing now had he lost.

There is a professor who predicted Trump's victory before most who now is telling us Trump won't finish his term--maybe not even a full year of his presidency.  He points to Trump's unwillingness to toe the GOP line and how much happier the party establishment would be with a traditional republican like Pence.  Trump will have many scandals--his scam "university" may be the first and could easily start something rolling to get him impeached if he is charged with fraud--some analysts say it doesn't matter if the "crime" was committed before he took office; if enough in power want him out, they can use something like this to show him the door.

Trump should be held accountable--and the Republican House and Senate can't be fully trusted to do this, so the media and the informed electorate can help.  But it's time to also start finding out what's made the country so broken someone like this can be elected, and seeing if there is a starting point to bring the disenfranchised back from their nihilistic decision to support such a polarizing figure.

Wednesday, November 09, 2016

It took this election result to get me back writing here...

To say I'm shocked, most of us are shocked, is an understatement.  Every week brought new atrocities from the mouth of he who is now the president elect.  Each horrible gaffe or disgusting statement led pundits to pronounce his doom, yet...

The majority of folks on my Facebook feed are sharing their grief and disbelief.  Comments in the key of "I can't believe America is so racist and bigoted" or "I can't believe so many people lost their minds" are most frequent.

I at first concur, and then I wonder.  I don't really think that tens of millions of people all think that the media created the recordings of all the outrages that spewed from Trump's mouth.  I can't believe that there are enough toothless methheads in rural America to put such a man in power.  So what is this?

I think it's a hand grenade rolled into the officers' tent by those who feel they are stuck waiting outside.

Strangely, the most coherent explanation of "what are they thinking?" I've seen comes from an article in Cracked magazine online:

http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-trumps-rise-that-no-one-talks-about/

It's worth a read, to get a tiny glimpse into the minds of "the other".  I think if there is one lesson that can prove valuable out of this disaster, is that the broad brush painting of the disenfranchised right needs to stop.  Every campus in North America is teeming with an array of the vocal victimized--folks who lay a minefield around their pain to ambush any who don't have the right terms or suitable guilt when daring to discuss their issues.

We have no doubt that there are legions of groups who have reason fear and hate Trump--women, blacks, latinos, the poor, the gay community, educators, health-care providers, children, single moms, the elderly, the disabled...  and there are so many more.  Yet when we talk about those who feel left out on the other side of the spectrum, we tend to assume it's because they long for 1955 when they enjoyed being on top of the racist, patriarchal pyramid, and they're trying to turn back the clock for everyone else because they're hateful evil bigots.

Maybe there's more depth and variation to that group than I have previously grasped.  Maybe some are motivated by other factors--cynicism about the established power structure within both major parties, disillusionment by the way the Sanders campaign was squashed, lack of vision within the speeches and position statements of Hilary--at least compared to what Obama, one of the most inspiring speakers in generations--regularly provided.

Yes, there are those who have little intellectual grasp of the complexity of the job they just handed to this nasty buffoon who, when they are questioned about the first things he should do as president focused on "building that wall" and "repealing the Affordable Health Care Act"--surprisingly frequent quote in one story I read--but that's not all of the 50+ percent of voters who chose the orange freak.  It's the others who may have to be engaged in conversation--people who might come around to seeing the value in contributing to a system instead of just wanting to tear it down.

By engaging each other, Democrats and Republicans may be able to address the things that hurt them both--things like the false dichotomy of the oppressive two-party system, the corrupting influence of lobbyists and corporate money, the lack of transparency in so many government agencies that leads to a platform for Russian-backed Wikileaks scandalmongering.

It has to change.  When the stupid man with no attention span begins to show his woeful ineptitude, nearly everyone will eventually begin to doubt this rash act, and perhaps think together, how to make sure it never happens again.