Trump the Heretic

Trump the Heretic

Many objections to Trump are purely aesthetic in nature. He is not “presidential”; he is “temperamentally unfit”; he is a danger to some utopian future; and in every case, he speaks words and uses a dialect in a way a puritan would disapprove of. But given that whatever it means to be “presidential” is born of custom and dogma, that the criticism of temperament is itself born of emotion, and the appeals to a dangerous future are the absurd products of revelation and prophesy, one might suspect that Trump is more like a heretic threatening the established and peremptory order while the fundamentalists are shaking panic-stricken in the comfort of their confession booths.

Actor Susan Sarandon, Dailywire correspondent Ben Shapiro, and Daily Show correspondent Aasif Mandvi have all compared Trump to the drunk uncle at a wedding party. We can excuse them whatever issues they have with their uncles, but picturing Sarandon, Shapiro and Mandvi with the same metaphor and at the same party, they come off as the prudes who leave early because merriment is biologically impossible for them. I don’t know about you but I would much rather sit at a table with a drunk uncle than spend a minute in tedious conversation with a group of pearl-clutching finger-waggers. Loosen your tie for God’s sake! I know, I know, the point about not wanting a drunk uncle to be the president is valid. The problem is, drunk uncle Trump doesn’t drink, has built a successful empire, and has amassed nearly half a century of leadership experience, and at any rate, would not be caught dead at your wedding. The metaphor will just not do.

But this seems to be the norm. The imagining of suspicious and ridiculous mental scenarios, comparisons and analogies in regards to a Trump presidency is all a prig really has nowadays, and prigs they are.

The motives and reasonings behind such blanket contempt towards Trump—a man who seems to get along just fine with people in general, but from a distance and through a media filter is the most dangerous man alive—are reminiscent of the motives held by the inquisitors of the past, and just as superstitious. Heretical ideas, behaviour and speech were denounced in the same way by both the tribalistic religious and the tribalistic classists throughout history, which perhaps explains why both right and left-wing puritans engage in the same sort of witch-burning when it comes to Mr. Trump, making for some odd but comfortable bedfellows.

“Trump is literally Hitler”, lamented comedian Louis CK.

“Trump hates Babies”, argued Rolling Stone Magazine.

“Donald Trump is the World’s Most Dangerous Man”, deplored Der Spiegel, adding that “Nothing would be more harmful to the idea of the West and world peace than if he were to be elected president”.

“This is how fascism comes to America”, wrote the Washington Post, in which a bellyaching writer reminded us “the attempt to treat Donald Trump as a normal political candidate would be laughable were it not so perilous to the republic”.

Laughable indeed. None of these are true, of course, and grounds for defamation, but the desperation is immediately apparent in how they maintain their fantasies, and which superstitions they will use in order to do so.

The trite and obsequious claims of “Trump is not presidential” are conformist and moralist in nature. If the demeanor and oratory abilities are of your prime concern, then you only prove your desire for custom, conduct, and posey, and other vain snobberies—not much else. One thing is for certain, Trump does not conform to some ill-defined standards and expectations in the moralist’s head. Trump doesn’t look the part, at least according to a fevered imagination. They cannot imagine a President Trump, only proving themselves to be lacking in imagination.

Avoiding fear-mongering is as easy as taking these appeals to revelation for what they are. When it is claimed that Trump is a danger to some future moment, we don’t catch an actual glimpse of what lies ahead, but of the faith-based paranoia of an ardent believer. With all of the hubbub around how Trump talks and (oh lord) his tweets, we are not given any evidence of how his dialect is perilous to the duties of leadership, to the success of an administration, or anything else for that matter, but of the sententious attitudes of puritanical prudes.

Speaking of temperament, the San Diego Union-Tribune, in a self-proclaimed historic endorsement of a Democrat for president, appealed to “temperament” before comparing Trump to Hugo Chavez and Cristina Kirchner, both of whom led their countries to chaos and corruption. Kirchner, herself a lawyer and politician, was criticized for corruption, crony capitalism, falsification of public statistics, harassment of independent media, the use of a tax agency as a censorship, and the use of public funds to attack political opponents in her candidacy in Argentina (according to Wikipedia). In a fit of irony, the San Diego Union-Tribune then goes on to show its support for lawyer and politician Hilary Clinton. Their logic here is based on one nauseating and emotional premise: “Imagine President Trump”, proving their arguments to be born of just that, imagination.

This cause for condemnation on imaginary grounds has worked historically well for the tribal and dogmatic minds concerned with heresy whenever it threatened their self-seeking allegiance and conformity, that ritualistic murder and atonement was once the only fitting punishment for it. When times are less superstitious, however, crying and pontificating is the only remedy for such irrational fears.

The grand inquisitors—the media and political classes—have already taken it upon themselves to engage the heretics with a moral crusade. Andrew Sullivan of New York Magazine said “it’s our patriotic duty to stop this maniac from becoming the president of the United States”. George Will tells the Republican establishment that “Republicans working to purge [Trump] and his manner from public life will reap the considerable satisfaction of preserving the identity of their 162-year-old party”. Jorge Ramos, leading Univision news anchor, says neutrality is not an option, and that there are instances in which journalists have to take a stand when confronted with “racism, discrimination, corruption, public life, dictatorships or violations of human rights”, none of which have even happened yet. So much for journalistic ethics.

There are many valid concerns against a Trump presidency, of course. Congress might actually have to do their jobs in keeping him in check. But the invalid concerns far exceed the valid ones in the public marketplace. Imagery of a fascist dystopian future, a nuclear war, a future rife with oppression and concentration camps, and as is the norm, the second coming of Hitler, pass through the minds of those who believe in the prophecy and revelations of an army of bloggers, political hacks and pundits, many of whom couldn’t predict what would happen later in the very same day, let alone later in a future Trump presidency.

Convicting someone of pre-crimes seems to be something straight out of Minority Report, but instead of utilizing psychics who can see in the future, we are using those who refuse to see beyond their dull and baffled rage.

cont.

Earlier this year 50 GOP national security officials were convinced that Trump would be “a dangerous President and would put at risk our country’s national security and well-being”. This is either revelation, prophecy, or merely the imagined contingencies of a paranoid orthodoxy. Many of these same national security officials were directly responsible for the policies of the Bush regime, which was scarred by the war in Iraq, the invasion of Afghanistan, the uncountable deaths of civilians in that region, the destabilization of the entire middle east, the stock-market crash and its subsequent bailout, all while leaving the American populace to foot the bill. If only they had applied their gift of prophecy to their own dealings. I wonder whose security and well-being they are most concerned with.

Hilary Clinton asserted in a typically robotic, flaccid and inhuman fashion (which is all it takes to be “presidential” par excellence) that “a man you can bait with a tweet is not a man we can trust with nuclear weapons”, perhaps forgetting that her own husband lost the nuclear ‘biscuit’ for months during his presidency. If her choice in men is any indication, she is not a great judge of temperament. Nonetheless, I wager she would do a better job than Bill in the Oval office, at least when it comes to keeping her pants on; but with nearly 30 years of experience in public life under her belt, such preventable disasters such as the mishandling of classified information seems inexcusable in the face of it.

How someone #-posts on the internet is hardly evidence of presidential temperament, but surely, decades of political controversy is. With Travelgate, Libya, Hilarycare, Benghazi, the mishandling of classified emails, the rigged primaries, and other dubious affairs, it is not only her Twitter feed that is evidence of temperament, but also most of her private and public life.

Nonetheless, the angles are there for the orthodoxy to rely on. If Trump ridicules a woman, or two, or three, it is an attack on women in general, as if women in general were above criticism. He hates immigrants even though he is married to one. Tweets are now absolute statements, not passing thoughts. One the one hand he is an idiot and buffoon who cannot be taken seriously; on the other hand he is a key player in a vast Russian conspiracy. On the one hand he isn’t as wealthy as he says he is; on the other hand he is too wealthy to relate to the people. His few business failures are evidence of where he will take the country while his successes are not. He is transparent enough to know his deepest thoughts and motives but so opaque to be a deceiver of the people. His failure to disavow or even acknowledge David Duke is his tacit acceptance of him and the KKK. He is a narcissistic sociopath even despite his good relations, his fiscal abilities, his endeavours, all of which would crumble at the first sign of a mental illness. Trump is a heretic.

This election is unprecedented. The violence and vandalism against Trump’s supporters, the perverted mockery of Trump’s body, the outright scorn and hatred thrown against a human being running a campaign in a free society, a propaganda machine eschewing journalistic ethics due to hubris, and a worried intelligentsia denouncing the mobil vulgis as too stupid, too ignorant to share in fantasies of their betters—even if he fails, Trump the heretic has exposed the tribal and conformist among us, that history itself will cast a shadow over them for their inquisition and crusades.


LesMis

Nice thread.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but I am told Trump is anti Establishment, although some say he is more Establishment than Hillary, so all the negative comments within the MSM is the price for wanting to change things within the Establishment.

One thing I found interesting watching the BBC the other night, is a seasoned politico working in the Whitehouse warned that Trump is unchangeable. In other words the Establishment will not be able to change him or his opinions.

But I have been saying all along that Hillary will win, the Bilderbergs have spoken and she must be crowned.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

TlDR: "I'm mad that people jump to conclusions about Trump's words and ignore the fact that people do the same things to Hillary Clinton. Plus I didn't want to put this in the rant section so I dressed it up with fancy words to hide the fact that I'm ranting."

What I see as unprecedented in this election is the degree to which some of the followers of one candidate or the other, people who are normally at least reasonable and cogent in their expressions, have become rabid reality-denying machines.

(Notice that I didn't mention a "side" before you go there.)

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

This speaks larger to society as a whole than anything else.

"Vote for Hillary because Trump said mean things", would be a joke at any other time than now.

Now? It is a talking point taken up by media pundits and the internet.

Ethics and morality aren't even talking points for this election other than as "throw aways" to insult the other opponent.


A conspiracy-minded person might think that this is all on purpose. To give the unwashed masses a sense of "campaign fatigue" so that whomever is elected, people could care less.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

In my opinion, what you have described is par for the course in American politics. Candidates are criticized, drug through the mud and every word inspected. It is not limited to just Trump. Your own words could be used to describe Hillary as well and she is no heretic.

Honestly, your OP comes off as if you are trying to paint Trump as some innocent victim and we should be ashamed for looking at his personality traits and question his temperament, in regards to leading and representing a country. You call it "imaginary". I would say it's recognizing the skill sets people may or may not have and hiring a person that has the skill set we need for the position.

Heritic? No. Trump is an asshole and should not be treated as if he is being persecuted, like those that would say the Sun revolves around the Earth.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

TlDR: "I'm mad that people jump to conclusions about Trump's words and ignore the fact that people do the same things to Hillary Clinton. Plus I didn't want to put this in the rant section so I dressed it up with fancy words to hide the fact that I'm ranting."

Projection seems to be the going rate as well. As I mentioned, some cannot see beyond their own dull and baffled rage.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I know right? Every time I see you talk you bitch about how people see Trump because of the words he says.

The bread and circuses stopped being enough to keep the masses entertained. So the establishment was forced to become part of the menagerie.

a reply to: introvert

I don't recall in recent memory any supporters being violently harassed and threatened for which candidate they support. Is it true of Clinton supporters as well?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I know right? Every time I see you talk you bitch about how people see Trump because of the words he says.

You haven't seen me talk. Another appeal to your vivid imagination.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

TlDR: "I'm mad that people jump to conclusions about Trump's words and ignore the fact that people do the same things to Hillary Clinton. Plus I didn't want to put this in the rant section so I dressed it up with fancy words to hide the fact that I'm ranting."

It was the longest rant/whine that I have ever read.

Whaaa...people don't like my Trumpy.

Sorry OP...but Trump is a douche. That is what won him the Republican primary, so don't cry about it now that he is being called out on it.

And to be fair...EVERYONE warned the Republican party that his douchey attitude wouldn't work in the general election. So you were warned, you just decided not to listen and claim that his abrasive attitude was the best thing about him.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Are we really going to play silly semantics games here? I guess I was on the nose when I said your thread is just another low content thread hiding behind an air of intellectualism (ie a rant).

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Since you can see me talking, know that I'm mad, and reach your conclusions behind a veil of your typical solipsism, maybe you can remind me of my intentions and desires at another time, since your feelings are not the topic.

Thank you very much LesMisanthrope!
Wanted to create a thread on this exact subject but knew someone with more eloquence(like yourself) would be far more suited for the task. We can't simply look at Trump the same way we look at typical presidential candidates. He is a product of a different environment. The private sector where they are used to getting things done on time and within budget. Something the federal government and it's crone's have been incapable of doing for generations now. Trump is the answer to their complacency and contempt for the average tax paying American citizen.

The fact anyone can have faith in a system that has failed them time and time again is beyond me.
It's like the Einstein definition of insanity.
How many times will we do the same thing expecting a different outcome?
How many presidents were unfulfilling of their campaign promises?
Why do we trust anyone who is a product of the public sector?
Their income is not dependent of the quality of work done. But rather how well they can lie and deceive us into thinking they actually care and can do the job they have been tasked. If they actually cared we would have a drastically different society where it's not profitable to own a prison but profitable to own a hospital.

Thank your politician for the loss of your quality of life. Not the business man that employees thousands and is bound by equitable duty to make his company as profitable as possible within the bounds of the law.

Blame the ones that created the system not the ones that use it!

a reply to: kruphix

And I don't trust in your judgement of character.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: introvert

I don't recall in recent memory any supporters being violently harassed and threatened for which candidate they support. Is it true of Clinton supporters as well?

That is not a product of Trump valiantly speaking truths that go against the establishment or accepted "dogma". That is a direct result of him lacking the "temperament" and skill set to bring issues to the forefront of the public debate without pissing-off and threatening entire sections of society.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
I know right? Every time I see you talk you bitch about how people see Trump because of the words he says.

It's not the words he says it's the misrepresentation of his words that drive us nuts!

Trump says:
"Some illegal immigrants are prone to rape because they actually come from a real rape culture".

You hear:
"All Mexicans are disgusting rapists!"

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: kruphix

And I don't trust in your judgement of character.

You don't have to trust in my judgment of character.

But the majority seems to have the same judgement as I do...so maybe your admiration of the man is blinding you.