Desperados
The ‘House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th 2021 Attack on the United States Capitol’ plans to open its hearings to the public sometime in May. Then, we are sure to learn a lot more about then President Trump’s role in the lead-up to the insurrection. Until then, given that he didn’t seem to relish performing the job itself and wasn’t very good at it, we are left to ponder just what it was that made him and his cadre so desperate to hold on to the office.
Only desperation accounts for the brash and extreme criminal actions taken by Trump and his coterie of extremists, quack lawyers, washed-up politicians, pseudo-intellectuals, and brownnosers during the period from just before the November 2020 election until January 6th, 2021? No one likes to lose, but openly trying to overturn an election??? Why was a second term so important to this lot? Were there other unknown crimes and misdemeanors committed by Trump and his administration that they hoped to cover up? Were willing to commit criminal acts in order to do so? Were the actions taken in order to facilitate large-scale criminal avarice in a second term? Was it all part of a scheme to install Trump as an autocrat for life? And, what quids pro quo were being proffered? Those who assaulted the Capitol on 6 January were but puppets (no quids for them) being manipulated by Trump and CO. It is possible that Trump himself is but a puppet. If so, whose, and why? The Committee had taken on a gigantic task. One essential to preserving our democracy. Trump and CO had come too close.
The January 6th insurrection was the effect. Whatever Trump and CO did in the lead up to January 6th was the cause. Before the November 2020 election, their slogan was still ‘Make America Great Again, MAGA. After the election, it become ‘Take Back America’. On January 6th, ‘Take Back America, was replaced by ‘Save America’. Each of these three slogans begged a call to action. All three were crafted to appeal to a specific audience; to be manipulatory. The first two, ‘Make America Great Again’ and ‘Take Back America’, were borrowed favorites of the far-right Tea Party of the Republican Party that sprung up in opposition to President Obama in 2009. The third, ‘Save America’, seemingly came directly out of the bowels of Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
‘Make America Great Again’ implied that America needed be restored to an earlier self without ever saying exactly when that was; something Trump followers seemed to know. What was it about the past that they found so attractive? About the present and probable future, that they didn’t like? The second slogan, ‘Take Back America’ may provide some clues. It implies that those to whom it appealed felt that America was once theirs; had of late been taken from them. That the America they once had was better because it was theirs, and would be better again if it was returned to them, its rightful owners. ‘Take America Back’ from whom? In America, we have a provision for deciding this sort of thing; something called the ballot. Likewise, in re ‘Save America’, circa 9 November 2020; save America from whom, for whom? From all others, for Trump & CO, of course. All these slogans were strings for manipulating the manipulable.
For Trump followers, the prospect of a President Biden meant that America would not be theirs again anytime soon, would not be ‘saved’, would not be made ‘great again’ (as they understood great to mean) soon. With the exception of the far-right, libertarian, anti-government, extremist militia groups, most of Trump’s supporters were a mishmash of manipulables who had little use for the truth, the facts, or reality. For them, Biden’s election meant that they were not getting their way. But then, not one of them knew how to drive a car anyway. They were unlikely to become desperate on their own. But, they could easily be manipulated into being so. By their own admission, that manipulation came down from Trump and his coterie. In early January 2021, a good many of them rushed to Washington D.C. to ‘Take Back’ and ‘Save’ America. Rushed with a good deal of assistance from dark money and groups like the Oath Keepers, Three Percenters, and The Proud Boys.
We know that Trump and his cadre were never ever the slightest bit concerned about what was best for America, the world. They were only concerned about their agenda; an agenda that we know was concentrated on a further seizing of the reins of government. Until May, there is still a lot that we don’t know. We do know that there are things that they have done that they do not want either the committee, the Justice Department, or the public to know.
The Committee’s focus has not on been the puppets who marched on the Capitol, but rightly on the puppeteers. Not on the followers, but the leaders. We will soon learn more about what all the Committee has found out about the role of Trump and his cadre, about who amongst them did what; especially, what role Trump himself played.
Narcissists do not know how to lose and gracefully move on. I doubt that many minds get changed by the facts. Hopefully though, then Zelensky will have a better chance of being elected POTUS in 2024 than Trump. Commitment bias plays a huge role in domestic politics, but the war in Ukraine has broken what is new ground to most self-indulgent Americans.
Text From Donald Trump Jr. Set Out Strategies to Fight Election Outcome
NY Times – April 8
(Maybe one day, Donald Trump Jr will get to be president. ‘Fool us once, shame on you. Fool us twice… Wait. They can get totally fooled again!’)
:<)
You know, throw in some collective intelligence and Michael Sandel in his Tyranny of Merit book may have gotten close to explaining/understanding the Trump phenomenon
Ken,
There are type I meritocrats, the rich that get to stay rich, and type II meritocrats, working people that get ahead by hard work and parsimony. What brought Trump into existence is that the type I meritocrats had been screwing over the type II meritocrats since WWII.
https://www.willpatrick.co.uk/notes/the-tyranny-of-merit-michael-j-sandel
Trump by Way of Technocracy
Brexit, Trump, soaring enthusiasm for nationalism – all are driven by the anger of the disenfranchised. They’ve become so disenfranchised by way of the political elites who have led us for the last fifty years. Sandel argues that this started with Reagan/Thatcher and was maintained by Clinton/Blair afterwards.
Specifically, the partnered problem to a culture of meritocracy is the policy of the technocracy. The technocracy ignores the left/right divide and talks more in terms of open/closed, strongly in favour of globalism.
‘More than a protest against immigrants and outsourcing, the populist complaint is about the tyranny of merit. And the complaint is justified.’
Down this road, jobs are taken offshore and sent to other, cheaper countries while the globetrotting cosmopolitan elites are vaunted as great successes. This leaves a large number of people with dwindling job prospects and lower economic security, even if GDP happens to be rising.
‘The median income for working-age men, about $36,000, is less than it was four decades ago. Today, the richest 1 percent of Americans make more than the bottom half combined.’
Today’s US version is much like China’s Mandarin society of pre-revolution, I think.
Ken,
Having a little time to dig deeper this morning, then I found that de Tocqueville had already perceived this problem that he believed endemic with democratic capitalism.
“…
However, the Americans de Tocqueville met all readily believed that through hard work, it was possible to make a fortune and that to do so was wholly admirable and right. There was hence no suspicion whatever of the rich, a certain moral judgement against the poor, and an immense respect for the capacity to make money. It seemed, quite simply, the only achievement that Americans thought worth respecting. For example, in America, observed de Tocqueville, a book that does not make money – because it does not sell well – cannot be good, because the test of all goodness is money. And anything that makes a profit must be admirable in every way. It was a flattened, unnuanced view that made de Tocqueville see the advantages of the relatively more subtle, multi-polar status systems of Europe, where one might (on a good day) be deemed good, but poor; or rich, but vulgar.
Democracy and Capitalism had created a relatively equitable, but also very flat and oppressive way for humans to judge each other…”
Ken,
My own personal belief is that human judgement is generally superficial when it regards matters of human nature. From the link on de Tocqueville that I posted then “Four: Democracy turns us against authority” and “Five: Democracy undermines freedom of mind ” largely explain the underpinnings of why this naturally occurs. The rest is developmental psychology and the human fear of its own mind being deeply revealed. Part of being judgemental is also being self-conscious towards one’s own flaws. Sibling rivalry magnifies this tendency at a very early age.
This quote from de Tocqueville is perfectly consistent with Jung regarding the neurotic consequences of prestige seeking democratic capitalism “In France, we are worried about increasing rate of suicides. In America, suicide is rare, but I am told that madness is commoner than anywhere else.” Again consider sibling rivalry in the competition for parental approval when not undermined by poverty and hunger. The author’s summation of de Tocqueville in this line is perfect “Democracy was, he thought, fatally biased towards mediocrity.”
What we should remember is that every mention of democracy actually refers to republicanism that was the highest aspiration of Niccolo Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes, and John Locke supported by status seeking materialistic capitalism to keep Freddie Nietzsche happy. What could possibly go wrong with that? Democracy has never been tried on the scale of modern nations and until recently would not have even been technically feasible. In the distant past then democracy worked on a small tribal scale in a few instances where strong man politics was not supported by martial societies. The responsibilities of true self-government cannot be thrust upon a deluded society with any realistic expectations of success. So, something better will take a long time to develop.
BTW, I was raised an only child in a median income household and I highly recommend it.
Ken,
The best online article that I have found on Kant’s “Good Will” is at the link below, but the cookie prompt was not in English preventing me from completing the intended cut and paste. In any case, Kant was reasonable in his opinion of moral judgement and good will for his own time, but I find that same simplicity dangerous in our time. OTOH, ill will is in such surplus in our own time that the failures of naive good will are not an overwhelming problem in contrast to greed, hatred, and cruelty, but ignorance is a huge and devastating force regardless of the moral state of will. That we still hold moral judgement based solely on intent in such high esteem is both ironic and misguided. This lends an entirely new meaning to the popular Keynes quote “In the long run we are all dead.”
The Good Will