What have you learned about America from the trump presidency?

I’ve learned that most, not all, of the Republican Party put their interests ahead of the US constitution and welfare of all Americans.

Never in my wildest dreams would I have thought so many of my fellow Americans, let alone PEOPLE I THOUGHT I KNEW, would endorse and blindly continue to defend a corrupt, sick man and a party- which has become a haven for right-wing extremists, pedophiles, rapists...

I realize now how bigotry is at the core of our country’s brokenness, and how religion is weaponized to allow bigotry to flourish. It's scary just how much influence religion has on policy, that it's growing, and how a complete fraud like trump can play on those beliefs despite not having a religious bone in his body.

I knew there was ongoing virulent racism, but I don't/can't believe the majority of people think this way. They are just more hatefully loud and aggressive than those of us who want Democracy and a unified, peaceful country. I fear we are too disbelieving of what's going on and not enough action.

The bigotry, and the profound depths of racism is alive and well in America. The disparities are endless and institutional. The electoral college was literally established so slave owners got more votes.

Should we be grateful that trump brought this to the surface? We can’t ever go back now. The hatred is really fear. Fear drives most folks unfortunately. It's so much more peaceful to be in acceptance. That’s true freedom.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

CountScrofula · 41-45, M

Honestly when reading history books about how populations descend into a kind of cultural madness I always went "How the hell does that happen?" Annnd we're seeing it now.

That said I don't hate on Trump supporters and consider Trump's success to be the failure of my very left world of politics - they were looking for answers and someone articulated their problems and gave them an easy answer. The easy answers are all a con.. but here we are.

It's a message for the left to step up and organize.

newjaninev2 · 56-60, F

@CountScrofula There are two ways to unite a country.

You can foster fear and hatred by telling the people that out-groups are causing all their problems, and that you can save them from those groups... all they have to do is to stop questioning your actions.

Leadership by chant.

The other way is to foster inclusion, acceptance, and tolerance, and that the country's problems are caused by, and able to be solved by, everyone accepting responsibility.

Leadership by conversation.

The first way is easy.

The second way is hard.

Kwek00 · 41-45, M

@newjaninev2

Maybe it's because the last part ussually doesn't work? 🤷‍♂️
Do you have good examples of a nation (not even a country, but a nation) gathering behind the banner of "acceptance and tolerance"?

... If that ever occured, ussually deeper problematic reason is behind it. Like national trauma. When people wake up from a genocide, mass murder, some outcome of hate, some irregularity in thought that creates a nation wide traumatic experience. Then suddenly the entire country "feels" that something needs to be done. And then you have a goal.

Your first reason, also goes deeper in the political sense. Ussually these actors foster a fear that the group they represent are in an immediate danger of survival. Their verry way of life is threatened. It's an "excistential" fear. And it recruits like crazy.

For more information on how this works... read: "The Concept of the Political" by Carl Schmitt. (it's a super small book, just read it carefully, it's really dense) You can also watch "philosophy tubes'" adaptation, which kinda does a good job explaining certain aspects of Schmitt.

I don't get where philosophy tube gets the:

* "Strike first" theory from, since I don't find it in the book. (I've read it like 3 times... you can argue that this logically follows, but I don't see schmitt advocating for it. It's just something that happens).

* Or how he can white wash leftists that fall in the same psychological problem. He understands Schmitts reasoning that a group has to "believe" something, and that this "believe" doesnt have to be based on facts. If you believe one group is threatening your life, this believe will eventually start leading it's own life. Doesn't really make anny diffrence for the in-group if the out-group doesnt understand your fears. But Philosophy Tube says at some point: "when you are a capitalist, you can stop oppressing people, and the leftists will leave you alone. It's as easy as that.". While before saying that bit, agreeing that when people "believe" in something that this "believe" is not rational. So I don't get why Leftists would suddenly go: "oh wait, you close down your factory, that's nice of you, come join the revolution.". I think tha shows his own bias right there. (and that's why I unsubscribed, cause he also explains some other books that I read, and I really wonder if he read them carefully).

[youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BcsKdvERZA]

Even tough he's biased as fuck (just stop listening when he talks about leftists) his idea on the book comes really close to the real deal. And yes, Schmitt was a NAZI, and he philosophy tube likes to emphasise that. He makes some extremely bad biased remarks about it when he discussess Schmitts book called "Political Theology", also really small and dense work.

If you want to read it, don't forget to read the introduction by George Schwab. He gives a fairly good critical annalysis. But this little piece of German political work, is still extremely discussed in political sciences today. And since tensions are rising within nations... it's kind of a hot toppic.