Scott Adams (of Dilbert fame) wrote some interesting commentary this week. How familiar it all sounds, given the SF/F storm of 2015. I agree with Scott. It’s a disheartening thing when any Presidential candidate excommunicates half the country from the human equation. That’s basically what Hillary Clinton did, with her quip about “deplorables.” She’s reading from the 21st century progressive playbook. I call it Moral Majority 2.0, which has taken all the worst qualities of the so-called Moral Majority of the 1970s and 1980s, and valorized them — with a progressive flavoring. It’s now perfectly okay to hate, despise, lie about, abuse, bully, browbeat (or physically beat!) people who are “bad” — because the “bad” people deserve it.
And who are these “bad” people, and how can we know them?
Why, they’re everyone who’s not voting for Hillary, of course.
I know, I know, it’s unconscionable — to not support Hillary. I mean, are we crazy? How can we not vote for Hillary? Even if she is a serial liar who evades accountability by buying off and/or intimidating people who might call her on the carpet? She’s going to be the first woman President in U.S. history! Why do we want to be on the wrong side?
I’ve seen and heard a lot of that kind of talk — about people being on the wrong side of history — during both the Obama years, and now the (soon to come) Hillary years. Usually issuing from the keyboards of so-called liberal opinionators who believe human civilization is on some kind of straight-line “ramp” ascending ever-upward to an idealized nirvana of economic, political, and social perfection.
To the liberal opinionators, they and theirs are on the ramp, while all the rest of us are merely hapless ideological road kill. We didn’t (or don’t) pick the right “team” therefore the choo-choo of inevitability is going to leave us behind — or run us over.
Like Moral Majority 1.0, there is a smug certainty to the declarations of Moral Majority 2.0, and Hillary’s “deplorables” comment was made precisely so as to tap into that smugness. For Hillary — and her ardent fans — the country is theirs, and theirs alone. The rest of us are just squatters. We’re going to be run off, or burned out. If not literally, at least figuratively. We didn’t pick the correct “side” so we will not be given a place at the table. We have been made “bad” according to the doctrines of Moral Majority 2.0 and there will be no redemption for us.
In other words, we are blocked from having moral validity, as well as virtue. The river of moral worth has been dammed up at Hillary Clinton. If you’re downstream, forget it. No moral worth for you. Either get with the program and be on the reservoir with the rest of the “right thinking, right voting” Hillary supporters — even the ones holding their noses — or you’re an outcast. You are cut off from the light of righteousness. Banished from the circle of humanity.
“Either you’re voting for Hillary, or you’re with those Nazi racist Trump voters!”
I’ve said in this space (before) that I am taking a Treebeard approach to the 2016 election: Side? I am on nobody’s side, because nobody is on my side. Forced to swallow Fish Hook #1 or Fish Hook #2, I choose a third option.
But that doesn’t mean I think the people voting for Trump are awful. I also don’t think the people voting for Hillary are awful, even if I think Hillary herself is an awful choice, in an awful election year. I fully respect the personhood of both voting blocks, even if I think neither of them is going to get anything like what they’re hoping for — from either of the two main, miserable candidates. So, I try to be careful to distinguish between my dislike of the candidates, and the voters supporting same. I’ve got good friends and even family who are voting for both Hillary and Trump. I don’t think this makes them awful people.
But there does seem to be a significant number of Hillary supporters who aren’t willing to accord me and mine — to say nothing of the Trump supporters — similar courtesy. To them, if you’re not standing with Hillary, you’re scum.
Remember how Bush (last decade) was excoriated for declaring, “Either you’re with us, or you’re with the terrorists”?
Progressives and liberals loathed, derided, and detested that sentence. They considered it proof of Bush’s retrograde, one-dimensional policy. Zero nuance.
Do any of Hillary’s proponents think twice, in our current election, before sneering about misogynist, racist, homophobic, Trump voters and independents?
If not, they probably should.
Frankly, if your first instinct is to label anyone who doesn’t behave or believe the way you do — racist, misogynist, homophobe, Nazi, etc. — I think the problem is far more on your side of the table, than not. You’re neither caring, nor compassionate. You’re merely impressed with your own moral and political rightness.
You’ve become a hoarder of rectitude. All for you, none for us. Nobody else is allowed to have any goodness. Only you — and everyone you deem worthy — gets to be good. Meaning, your monocultural opinions and ideas are the only ideas given any standing in a given conversation. Everyone else who isn’t “smart” enough to believe and think just like you, is a moral monster.
And we all know that monsters are fair game. You can vandalize their property, call them bad names, call their family and their children bad names, lie about them and spread lies to defame and undermine them, threaten their jobs, stage repeated on-line mob sessions or street protests resembling 1984’s infamous Two Minute Hate, and much worse. Because monsters deserve what they have coming to them.
Monsters aren’t on the “team” pushing this country up the “ramp” leading to the perfection of the human condition.
Therefore, anything done to or said about a monster, is perfectly okay. Even terrible, hate-filled untruths, designed to evict decent folk from the human condition. It’s all good. They’re only monsters.
When Hillary called us “deplorables” she was saying we not only do not matter, but that we’re terrible people who do not exist in the realm of individual dignity. In true Hillary fashion, everyone who is not useful to her, is deemed an outlander. We’re off the chart of civilization. We are just in the way of Hillary’s vision of progress.
This kind of thing has happened regularly throughout history. The many Moral Majorities — and their bold leaders — which have marched brazenly across every continent. How or why we don’t learn from the past, is probably explained by the fact that self-righteousness is a hell of a drug. Convince a man that he’s got the moral “right” to be terrible to another human being, and that man will do all manner of atrocity — in the name of what he believes to be correct. Or true. Or virtuous. Because he’s been given an excuse.
The various Marxist movements of the 20th century were all certain that their “way” was the inevitable — indeed, scientific — path forward. Hundreds of millions of human beings suffered and /or were killed, for the sake of the Marxist certainty that their ramp to societal perfection, was so just and so absolute, that nobody could deviate without being an obviously amoral and pernicious individual. Worthy of jail. Torture. Execution. And other heinousness.
Of course, the Marxist road to a perfect society, predictably crumbled beneath them. Because history is not a straight line. It is an oscillating waveform. Depending on your view, the present time may be a peak, or a trough; or maybe somewhere in between? The “inevitable” course of history has an uncanny tendency to swerve sharply from expected trajector(ies).
Thus it may be that the finger-pointers of 2016 — those who happily mock and abuse us “deplorables” — will learn a little humility.
Again, self-righteousness is a hell of a drug.
Virtue signaling, Brad, virtue signaling. And thus sound and fury, signifying little, if not nothing. You speak rightly about how awful Hillary Clinton and Marxism are…and yet you refuse to take the obvious next step, support for Trump. Me? Contrary to every virtue-signaler in the world, I’m quite comfortable with everything Trump has said and done. And I hope he goes into overdrive, as he promises, when he is elected. Last chance folks. Vote for Trump or die (that a metaphor, for you regressives always trying pass yourselves off as being related to “progress”).
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be “cured” against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.”
― C.S. Lewis
Everything? Everything he’s said and done? There’s no human short of Christ Himself to whom I can extend that level worship. Sorry man. I might vote for the guy. But you’re deluded.
Speaking only for myself, I couldn’t play the “Hold your nose and vote!” game this year. I was fully prepared to support Cruz or Rubio. But Trump? I am too well acquainted with the man’s history. Ditto for Hillary. Given the track records of both candidates, I deemed them equally unfit. It didn’t matter to me that Trump presently poses as Hillary’s enemy. He’s been her friend far, far longer — and in more intimate ways. There is a point at which I am unwilling to give a candidate a pass, just because (s)he opposes someone I think is terrible. When both options are completely bad, I have to take my interest elsewhere. McMullin is poised to take Utah’s electoral votes away from Democrats and Republicans alike. I am backing him for this reason. It would be the strongest possible “protest” vote — for both parties to be reminded that no red nor blue state can be taken for granted.
Reblogged this on Food for Thought and commented:
Definitely food for thought. What do you think?
Charles Krauthammer’s key to understanding American politics: Conservatives believe liberals are stupid; liberals believe conservatives are evil.
“It didn’t matter to me that Trump presently poses as Hillary’s enemy. He’s been her friend far, far longer ”
Thus my comment: he’s as much a Republican and I am the bloody Queen of England. (says the Scots/Irish/Cherokee feline)
Wow. Getting pretty murky, nasty, and deep here.
Cannot support Trump, his racist and misogynistic ways. And TBF, endorsements by groups like the KKK are a bad sign. Voting for Hilary doesn’t mean I support her “basket of deplorables” statement, but I understand it. But I certainly don’t think everyone who votes for other candidates are wrong and/or evil. Wtf is going on out there?
“TO GET BACK AT THE BIG CITY LIBERALS, WE’RE GONNA GET THE BIG CITY LIBERAL ELECTED! THAT’LL SHOW EM!”
Um…K. Trump supporters are weird
He’s been her ‘friend’? Really? And you know this -how-?
If you wanted to do business, you had to pay off the Clintons. That doesn’t make him their friend, it just made him another person forced into playing the game.
And yes, take those electorial votes away from Trump, anything to make it easier for Clinton to win.
Clinton is evil. Sorry, but she is.
Those who support her are equally evil, they know she’s guilty as hell, they know she lies about everything. But they have chosen to look the other way in the support of their god.
Most of what you hear about Trump is just pure bullshit. Just like it was about Romney, just like it was about Palin. Now I personally don’t care if you don’t vote for Trump, but please, spare me the moralistic bullshit. You’d rather see Hillary than Trump as president. I get that, so do the rest of us. Just don’t think that standing on the sidelines is going to spare you should she win. And don’t think any of us are impressed by your ‘morals’. Jesus Christ isn’t running for President, and he never will be. Holding your vote until he does is pointless.
And remember all the people you asked to hold their noses and vote for Romney, and McCain before that. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, all nose holding requests have suddenly been forgotten.
Kind of reminds me of the aliens trying to stop humanity from colonizing the stars in Christopher Anvil’s The Law Breakers. Their downfall was that all their thinking was the same, while the humans advantage was all their infighting and trying to think of new ways to do something.
He’s been her ‘friend’? Really? And you know this -how-?
Besides all the photo opps? And being a registered Democrat? He took a meeting with Bill just before announcing his run. That’s fairly suggestive.
Get ready for a flood of SJWs accusing you of supporting Trump and a flood of alt-Righters accusing you of supporting Hillary.
Since I am neither, I congratulate you on an insightful blog post.
I’m relieved more and more of your readers have been coming out with their discernment you’d rather see Hillary elected than Trump — something which had been quite transparent in many of your previous posts. A forthright assertion of your true inclinations would have been more appreciated, Brad. That you were able to generate some kind of hit piece on Hillary when you won’t make that one sacrifice of “holding your nose to vote for the Republican candidate” which others are willing to do — just for the sole purpose of stopping her is a bit odd. You may already know McMullin has admitted his main goal is to help impede a Trump victory. At least he’s clear on that.
As much as I don’t like othering language in politics, a good part of why I’m not supporting Trump is that I cannot in good conscience do anything but oppose anyone supported by the—yes, deplorable!—machinations of the white nationalist alt-right.
It’s hard to become too worked up about Clinton’s discarding of the alt-right as disgusting and deplorable when I feel that way about them myself. If only Buckley were here to eject the Birchers once more.
If they’re with Trump, I can’t be.
Besides all the photo opps? And being a registered Democrat? He took a meeting with Bill just before announcing his run. That’s fairly suggestive.
Fairly suggestive of what? Lots of people took photo ops, and in NY, if you’re not a registered Democrat, it’s incredibly hard to get certain work, because they only give it to registered democrats.
That’s they way they do business.
It by no means says that he’s her ‘friend’. And if he was her ‘friend’ why is he running against her? Really, you need to stop believe all the BS that’s being fed to you in an effort to make you either stay home, or vote for hillary. It’s like Scott Adams said: You’ve been conned.
How about the liberal policies he’s supported over the years. He’s said he no longer holds those views. But he’s also said that anything he says should only be taken as a suggestion. He’s also changed his mind several times about what he’s said just within this calendar year. Why is he running? Ever since he announced I’ve thought it was either as a joke (more TV time for him) or as a ruse to subvert the GOP. I’m not even a Republican, but have thought him to be amongst the worst of the GOP candidates ever selected.
He’s definitely a con man. Whether he’d make a decent political leader for this nation or not I don’t know. But I know there’s nothing coming out of his mouth that I trust. At least not anymore than I would trust a strung out prostitute exiting a clinic specializing in STD treatment with a patient ID around her wrist. Credibility wise he’s as deplorable as Hillary is.
Geena, “stopping” Hillary by voting for Trump, is like stopping Sauron by voting for Saruman. I understand you disagree, and I respect the disagreement. But I see no “sacrifice” in voting for Trump, beyond sacrificing my ability to say no to a choice I find morally and ethically unworkable. Hillary is awful. But in Trump I see a similar kind of awfulness, and I am aghast that both of them have lined us up for what will essentially be a no-win scenario; come election day. Again, I don’t think Trump or Hillary are liable to be anything like what their constituencies believe.
He’s running to hog the spotlight, or as a favor to the Clintons, or both. Judging by the fact he’s already planning his own TV network after the election, he’s not running to win.
He’s also on record as donating to the campaign for the current Virginia governor, a staunch Clinton supporter.
He’s running to hog the spotlight, or as a favor to the Clintons, or both.
I’ve seen some pretty bizarre statements about this election, but this one takes the cake.
I’m sorry, but you can’t make an argument to support that, logical or otherwise. Maybe if he was running a lack-luster campaign against her, like say McCain or Romney did against Obama, I’d believe that. But he isn’t, so I can’t.
And a reply to a comment further up, yes I do hope Trump destroys the GOP, that’s one of the three reasons I’m voting for him (the other is to stop Hillary of course). The GOP, after turning traitor on the very members of the party and supporting the democrats, deserves to be destroyed. We need a second party in this country, not just one.
As for those of you who would rather see Hillary elected, because you think it will be ‘better’ for you or the country than Trump. Fine, just say that, and go vote for her. Please don’t torture us with your convoluted (and unsubstantiated) logic.
I mean OH MY GOD!!! A businessman donated money to a democrat!!! You didn’t bitch when Romney did it.
Vote for him if you want, it’s your country. I trust him as much as I trust Hillary — not at all.
Actually I hae a slightly different problem. I don’t trust Trump to carry through on her promises, but I do trust Hillary to try and follow through on hers (at least until she gets bribed to do something worse)
Thus it may be that the finger-pointers of 2016 — those who happily mock and abuse us “deplorables” — will learn a little humility.
They won’t. They never do. Why? Because they hate you.
I would ask you to consider Trump because unlike Hillary… he will actually help you even if you don’t agree with him.
I would ask you to consider Trump because he will probably make mistakes… but his love of country comes off as genuine.
There is room for you in the Trump camp if you don’t agree with everything he says.
There is no room for you in the Hilliary camp if you went the same tack.
One is an imperfect man who has imperfect plans and imperfect vision. The other is wholly corrupt.
WTF is SF/F?
Everyone’s been looking at this wrongly, thinking it’s about electing someone with regard to how they’ll conduct themselves as president. No. Elect someone with regard to whether it will be possible to terminate their presidency if it’s as bad as we fear.
Seriously, have we listened to the rationales everyone’s putting forward for keeping the opponent out of office? The vile deeds that are feared are often impeachable offenses. Well then.
Elect the person who will be easiest to impeach.
Would Republicans join Democrats to impeach Trump? Yes.
Would Democrats join Republicans to impeach Clinton? No.
“Fairly suggestive of what? Lots of people took photo ops, and in NY, if you’re not a registered Democrat, it’s incredibly hard to get certain work, because they only give it to registered democrats.”
Trump does only a small part of his business in NYC, and no, you don’t have to be a registered Democrat to get a building permit there
He donated money to all of Clinton’s campaigns before this one. He publicly and fulsomely praised her on many occasions. He invited her to his last wedding.
He’s not Clinton – but he’s no more than one step away from Clinton – by his own choice.
“WTF is SF/F?”
Science Fiction/Fantasy. Reference to the Hugo Award & Sad Puppy campaign
“Side? I am on nobody’s side, because nobody is on my side. Forced to swallow Fish Hook #1 or Fish Hook #2, I choose a third option.”
Except Treebeard was smarter than you, because he recognized that Fish Hook #1 actually was being trolled by someone who wanted to fillet him and fry him, while Fish Hook #2 was someone who was into catch and release.
There is no third option.
Rich Rostrum, all I have to say is that it’s obvious you’ve never done business in nor lived in NYC. Your opinion should be judged accordingly.
“machinations of the white nationalist alt-right.”
Demon John, it truly amazes me that neither you nor Brad realizes that to Hillary YOU ARE THE ALT-RIGHT.
I’m especially surprised seeing it from Brad after the whole Sad Puppies affair….. but then I remember all the badly abused dogs I’ve seen who still look up at the kicker begging for a pat.
Why do Democrats lie, cheat, and stealbelections? Because they can, and because it works. Why do they call their opponents vile names? Because they can, and it works. They considered their opponents to be their enemies, who must be defeated and destroyed.
If a self-identified, self selecting group identifies other groups as enemies worthy of death and destruction, and then works towards that goal, what do we call that? Oh, if there were only some word to describe fundamental, existential conflict between groups.
Oh, if only there were some way to know if this sort of situation has ever before occurred. Oh, if there were only some way to tell which group people belonged to, si I could tell which one I was in and which my neighbors and those armed strangers walking up the middle of the road.
Oh, if only there were some way for side B to defend itself from side A when side A decides it’s hunting season. Oh, if only there were some way to identify myself as not choosing either side in this existential conflict, so both (all?) Sides would just ignore me and let me get on with my life.
I know – I’ll criticize both sides. Surely, the side which accepts moral differences will accept that, as will the side which opposed all moral differences. Surely, the side which has a history of exterminating opposition will accept me just as well as the side which politely debates with its opposition.
After all, side A is known to be evil and vile, while side B might not be pure and good, so they are equivalent. So I choose to sit on the sidelines and shake my head sadly at the conflict. After all, neither side is entirely on my side, so I can not entirely support either side. I am not interested in politics or the coming conflict, so politics and conflict will not be interested in me.
Sorry, Brad, I just can’t buy that any more. I loved your book, and admired your restrained, gentlemanly running of Sad Puppies last year. But I will disagree with you here and now, because I do believe that some things are worth fighting for. If my enemies wish to dstroy me, I have the right to fight back. All tactics and strategems used by one side are fair game for the other.
If you wish to sit quietly n the sidelines and hope the tides of civil strife wash around the rock of your home, you should remember to be quiet. Crowing your neutrality identifies you as a target to both sides, as neither can fully trust you.
As for me, I have chosen my side. Or rather, the side which has declared unconditional war on traditional America has chosen my side for me. Then again, my home town was still burning witches in my childhood, and I joined the Army to protect western civilization and kill the godless communists, so I come by it naturally.
One minor correction: Hillary didn’t excoriate half of the population, it was only a quarter. She said half of The Donald’s supporters are deplorable. Depending on the poll, he is supported by half of the voting population == a quarter.
Of course, under her religion, “deplorable” has a specific meaning: to be irredeemable, incapable of salvation. So there’s that.
OK. Thanks. Because I am unfamiliar with “Sad Puppy” I still don’t “get” the reference, but at least I can look it up now if I want.
Actually it’s unconscionable to support either main ticket candidate. They are both thieves and liars.
I’ve been voting for alternative candidates since I was 18, almost 40 years ago. I find Trump to be a refreshing opportunity to vote for a Republican again. The only Republican Presidential candidate I’ve vote for in the last 30 years is Juan McLame, and I only voted for him because I was hoping he would have an accident and Sarah Palin would become President.
I don’t understand why it should change my judgment of the alt-right whether someone else thinks I’m with them or not. The reality is, I’m not with them, I feel that they and their sympathizers are the reason that conservatism is on a cultural losing streak, and since they are in opposition to my principles, I will oppose them—to a shared grave, if necessary.
By the way, for those who are saying “my state will vote for Hillary no matter what”, may I point you at the 1980 elections where states that had not gone republican for decades went republican?
It’s not good to assume that any state is unwinnable for either candidate
“All tactics and strategems used by one side are fair game for the other.”
Ah, so you would use the Ring out of a desire to do good.
I just hope that my fears regarding the electoral machines won’t hold true. =/
Having both major parties nominate hateful candidates, as they have done this year, is a great opportunity for people like me who want a real alternative on the ballot. By supporting Gary Johnson we will help the Libertarians replace the Republicans as a major party. (I can’t see any reason even to consider the guy who is on the ballot in Utah and only one other state, because he truly can’t possibly win, nor will he leave a functioning party behind him even if he wins Utah.)
As far as considering Trump misogynist and/or racist — get real. Only SJWs believe that. Granted that bit about “grabbing” women was overboard, but that’s just thinking like a lawyer. Lawyers have such good knowledge of the practical limits of what they can get away with that it’s only natural for them to take advantage of it. And even that’s only if Trump ever actually did what he bragged about — and I’m not at all sure I believe a word he says on any topic.
If Trump really supported the positions he’s taken during this campaign, he would have supported Ted Cruz rather than run. He ran in order to throw this election to Clinton, and he’s not about to stand down from doing it. Indeed, I expect more outrageous pronouncements from him between now and election day. He’ll make sure he can’t win because he doesn’t want the job. After all, if he got it, we’d expect him to make good on his promises, and his batting average on doing that is pretty lousy.
I’m still not sure who I’m going to vote for on election day; it’s a strategic decision depending on how the state’s polls look. I could vote Trump to take down Hillary, Johnson to push things more libertarian, or even Stein (though I hate her policies) to hurt the Democrats in the long run. Still, I think I need to play Devil’s Advocate here and make the case for Trump.
Yes, he’s an a**hole. Yes, he’s in many ways a liberal. Yes, he’s a horrible person. However, we’re not just electing Trump, we’re electing the heads of the executive branch of government, and given the current Supreme Court, we’re also likely voting for the judicial branch as well. Mike Pence is not my favorite politician, but he’s solidly on the Republican side. Trump seems to have done better research on finding conservative Supreme Court candidates than the last Republican presidents. And if he does turn out to be the reanimated corpse of Josef Stalin in a clever disguise, what’s he going to do without congress?
Second, you can’t trust anything you cant verify yourself, except that people will act in their own interests. No politician is trustworthy. Not Trump, not Clinton, not even a genuine ‘nice guy’ like Romney. Politics is the art of the possible, the art of compromise, and that includes compromising principles. You can’t govern if you don’t win the election. However, there are things we do know, because we experienced them ourselves. We know the media was willing to smear the Sad Puppies campaign as a bunch of racist and sexist liars to win the Hugos. Now in order to win the Presidency of the United States, they are telling us that the guy they want to lose is a supported by a bunch of racists and sexists, and we believe them? Yes, even a stopped clock can be right twice a day, but think of how much of what you know about Trump is brought to you by people that you know are willing to lie to advance the Progressive agenda.
Right now, Hillary Clinton has promised to change the first amendment in order to allow the government to prosecute people making movies critical of her. Right now, she’s subverted the rule of law to get the FBI to cover up her crimes. Is she going to be easier or harder to deal with as President of the United States? Is it going to be easier or harder to fix things after she’s had four years to further bend the government to her heel?
You are the reason that I am voting for Donald Trump.
I have been a libertarian for twelve years and was quite skeptical of government well before that. I have never voted for any candidate, in any election, on any level. I regard the state as the single most destructive entity every created on Earth. I consider limiting the power and reach of the state and consequent freedom as the most important factor to my and my childrens’ future health and prosperity. In the long run–possibly a decade or more out–a more free society will be of benefit to absolutely everyone, though there will be a prolonged period of painful readjustment. Ron Paul came closest to my outlook and ideals, though I could see that he never truly had a shot at taking the office. I knew back then that the media was against him, but it wouldn’t be until this election cycle that I would understand the depth of that opposition.
When we say that the Clintons are corrupt, it is like saying that the surface of the sun is a bit balmy. We have truly never seen anything quite so cancerous as the Clintons in the relatively short history of our republic. There is a basic decency and morality that you and I take for granted, the unspoken measure of trust that we have as civilized people who play fair because we each expect the same from the other. Hillary Clinton lacks that basic morality. Leftists are blind to it, either because they need the illusion of their own moral superiority as supplicants to the god of tolerance, or because they have become dependent upon the apparatus of the state that she promises will continue forward into perpetuity. Spend some time perusing what people have been pulling out of the Wikileaks releases and you will get an idea of who you are dealing with. When they face scandal, there is no regret for their actions. When there is a chance to corrupt the political process, they take it. When any opportunity to seize the levers of power presents itself, nothing else matters.
What is worse is that the Clintons are reflective of the malaise that currently inhabits Washington, which has spread its sickness into the media and academia, and which corrupts the entire election process. The reason that we as a nation are struggling is that that corruption is now infesting both our culture and the economy in ever more egregious ways. The left is pushing hedonism and tyranny, and there are many libertarians like me that were or still are blind to it. We assume the evil of the state so completely that I think we fail to notice some of its more insidious incarnations. The statists aren’t just looking for money and power, but have launched a war to change our culture.
You played a part in that culture war last year. This year we have seen a hard push back against political correctness and social justice as more people wake up to their destructiveness, just as I woke up to it when I stumbled upon a Breitbart article about Sad Puppies 3. I didn’t know you at that time, but I had read a few of Larry Correia’s books and knew a bit about him and his politics. You were the one that shocked me out of complacency and indifference, that grabbed me by the hair and shoved me down the rabbit hole to see firsthand how bad things were beneath the surface.
Over the next year-and-a-half, I discovered Gamergate and various alternate media personalities that I had only vaguely heard of, and that only in unilaterally negative terms. I went from disapproving of the excesses of feminism to being horrified by how vicious and nonsensical it truly is. It made me rethink the narrative of violent police that I had swallowed after Ferguson. I realized that my libertarian thinking, which is still largely intact, had nevertheless allowed me to exist in a bubble where culture was an afterthought to freedom.
As I said, it is because of you that I, a longtime non-voter who despises politics on principle, am voting Trump. It didn’t happen overnight. In fact, it took more than half a year for me to come around to the idea that supporting a political candidate could ever be wise or principled. Just think about it: what is it that social justice warriors want more than anything? What does it mean for them to win? It is your silence. They want to control the dialog, right down to which words can and cannot be used. They use shame and ostracism as a tool to enforce conformity They thrive on guilt and hate virtue and competence. Donald Trump takes a wrecking ball to those tactics. He does it with his unrehearsed directness, his refusal to kneel and kiss the toes of the harpies on the left who know no virtue but the fake tolerance of liberal conformity. He does it with his competence as a businessman, his ability to persuade, and his courage in launching a campaign that he knew was going to cost him dearly. Trump represents everything that the puppy kickers hate about us.
If I can’t convince you that Trump is on your side against the SJWs, there is the one other thing that I think you have overlooked. Trump’s decision to fund his own campaign was not a media stunt, but a repudiation of state and cultural corruption, primarily by the left, but with no small amount of appeasement from the right. Trump could have reached out to the big donors and, with the promise of a few favors, gotten plenty of support. His refusal to do so did work in his favor by making the news, but it also triggered the establishment to attack him from both sides. When he talks about “draining the swamp”, it means that he intends to expose the corruption in Washington. I believe him in this because I see how he could have taken the easier path. Now that he has come this far, he’s going to have to follow through, or the establishment will bury him.
This isn’t another Romney vs. Obama election. It is not the time for me to disdain the whole enterprise as an exercise in picking new oligarchs who will plunder our resources, It is not the time to lose graciously while admitting in private that of course your party’s candidate was lackluster and there was never a real chance of winning anyway. I’m willing to risk the less attractive parts of what Trump has said, the role that he envisions for government where I think it does not belong, for the chance that he might actually start to make the changes we need to steer us away from state-worshiping atheism, vicious feminism, and curtailment of freedom in favor of enforced equality.
Did you know that a primary motto and slogan of the John Birch Society is, “The essence of liberty is the limitation of government?” They consider it a distillation of the philosophy of our most important founding fathers, such as Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Mason, and even Alexander Hamilton in spite of his odious bank.
A good friend of mine, Sam always says, you can’t spell Progressive without the ‘SS’
You thought the Trump Campaign was huge, just wait until you see Trump TV!
Honestly I believe that the, “choo-choo of inevitability” comes for us all eventually. In one way or another at least.
Comments are closed.