The question is why do so many people think the rules are unfair, to the point of wanting to abandon all rules, as Trump instructs, when the rules have largely favored Americans, creating a rather safe and productive society (for whites, anyway). And the answer is that the GOP has been cultivating a climate of complaint among whites for 50 years, where every good is ignored and trivialized and every failure - governmental and social - is exaggerated and toxified, to the point now where the mostly white MAGA world intends to tear it all down. The new Trump administration will be a No-Rules administration, a celebration of power unchecked by ethical, or even practical consideration. Every ethical collapse, every grift and every injustice imposed by the new regime will be celebrated as confirmation to those love him, that Trump was right, rules are for suckers (and lib-tards). What could possibly go wrong?
Only two points to add. Demagogues effect these changes. And, human beings are followers, rarely anything else. The history of demagogues and cults of personality prove these effects. That's why the key to the success of a democracy or republic is to keep demagogues and authoritarians out of executive power. No 1 thing these forms of government must do.
For sure. But looking back, I always see Reagan as the opening move in this cultish demagogic GOP slog and I wonder, given our preference for tolerance of deviant thinking and behavior as a function of a free society (until harms are proven), how Dems, or anybody could have forseen the denouement we are now experiencing. I knew, even as a disengaged youth, that there was something deeply wrong with Reagan making fun of democratic governance, but I couldn’t have put it all together to say it was the seed of our democracy’s destruction. This is where education and philosophy actually matter (even if it makes you elite), because one would have to show how destructive the GOP’s convincing people that majority democratic rule was destined to fail or cause harm and that the sanctity of voting and civic participation were a joke, and then mount a defense that people would take seriously. People loved Reagan’s joke, and no one could think of a way to counter it and still get elected. When could the Dems have stepped in and argued the case that democracy matters? What would they say? Clinton’s triangulation was an accession to the corrupt anti-democratic ideas of conservatism, what would have happened if he refused to play?
Let's perhaps talk sometime. My focus is on Americans' lack of understanding of constitutional republican government, especially the ignorance of political leadership in this regard, and therefore our lazy, laissez-faire approach to our democracy over the past 50 years––notably removing checks and balances against the rise of demagogues and authoritarians to executive power. That's a death sentence. Here we are on death row, waiting, hoping, praying for clemency.
I'd love to talk sometime, best over beer! I'm very interested in the idea of government and how I believe Americans have lost the inspirational thread to the core concepts/principles in our constitution and democratic systems. I'm not an academic, so I can't argue the particulars, my approach is a) philosophical and b) psychological, and I'm picky about semantics, I like to try to make words speak my thoughts succinctly. I think you are in DC and I'm in CA, so the beer would have to be virtual, in Zoomland, I guess. Phones work too. Text me at (sevenoseven) 775-5889 if you'd care to start a conversation, if/when you have time.
oops, wrong button….. in our more quotidian behaviors, like abiding the rule of law and defending democracy. Who doesn’t bend around these rules now and again, speed on the highway, include some fake expenses in our tax return? What Trump stands for to his core, and what makes him popular among the reluctant rule-followers among us (pretty much everyone) is his example of no-rules living. He not only refuses to follow rules, he intentionally and publicly broaches them and then manages to evade paying the price for his rule-breaking, not only the social price of disdain and judgement, but even for crimes of which he is obviously guilty. He is a paragon of anti-virtue. Everything he says and does is a pantomime of this message: rules are for suckers, and people who think the rules are unfair gather round him as moths to flame. The infamous “elites” of the coasts, whose supposed intellectual snobbery is a humanitarian crime against the common folk, are really just people standing up for the ethical frameworks (rules) that, until now, governed our lives. The disdain that normal, rational, patriotic Americans express for the people who have abandoned democracy and the ethics upon which it was formed is absolutely justified. Disdain used to be a sufficient social force to keep people in compliance, but Trump and his followers ignore, even celebrate the disdain, they eat it for lunch before tromping off to their next session of vandalism against American values.
I see this second comment now. I'm 100% in agreement. I should be writing soon about the most delightful collection of 185 letters ever written: Cato's Letters in the 1720s London. Some of your themes are expressed there with extraordinary passion and outrage.
Hi Eli, we tend to think of ethics in black and white, right and wrong, and there are those - against killing and stealing, etc - but ethics are also the softer rules that guide us
Just today, I was commenting to someone that our real problem in America is the end of civic virtue. I don't see the concept as quaint or archaic at all. The heart of a well-run government must contain people who genuinely believe in the betterment of all rather than the selfish furtherance of themselves or their friends. Sadly, right now, we have the cult of the strong man with his pathological drive to steal for himself and his friends and harm people he doesn't like. In other words, the opposite of civic virtue; in fact, Trump and his ilk make a mockery of the concept as weak and laughable. This confirms the weakness of their character and the essential nullness of their plans.
A book I just started by Heather Dutton Dudley (2020), “The Free and the Virtuous: Why the Founders Knew that Virtue Mattered,” speaks to the essential role of ethics in a republic. As to the consoling function of philosophy, this makes me think of Boethius’s “The Consolation of Philosophy,” where philosophy consoles him though he’s been sentenced to death by the Ostrogothian king.
The question is why do so many people think the rules are unfair, to the point of wanting to abandon all rules, as Trump instructs, when the rules have largely favored Americans, creating a rather safe and productive society (for whites, anyway). And the answer is that the GOP has been cultivating a climate of complaint among whites for 50 years, where every good is ignored and trivialized and every failure - governmental and social - is exaggerated and toxified, to the point now where the mostly white MAGA world intends to tear it all down. The new Trump administration will be a No-Rules administration, a celebration of power unchecked by ethical, or even practical consideration. Every ethical collapse, every grift and every injustice imposed by the new regime will be celebrated as confirmation to those love him, that Trump was right, rules are for suckers (and lib-tards). What could possibly go wrong?
Only two points to add. Demagogues effect these changes. And, human beings are followers, rarely anything else. The history of demagogues and cults of personality prove these effects. That's why the key to the success of a democracy or republic is to keep demagogues and authoritarians out of executive power. No 1 thing these forms of government must do.
For sure. But looking back, I always see Reagan as the opening move in this cultish demagogic GOP slog and I wonder, given our preference for tolerance of deviant thinking and behavior as a function of a free society (until harms are proven), how Dems, or anybody could have forseen the denouement we are now experiencing. I knew, even as a disengaged youth, that there was something deeply wrong with Reagan making fun of democratic governance, but I couldn’t have put it all together to say it was the seed of our democracy’s destruction. This is where education and philosophy actually matter (even if it makes you elite), because one would have to show how destructive the GOP’s convincing people that majority democratic rule was destined to fail or cause harm and that the sanctity of voting and civic participation were a joke, and then mount a defense that people would take seriously. People loved Reagan’s joke, and no one could think of a way to counter it and still get elected. When could the Dems have stepped in and argued the case that democracy matters? What would they say? Clinton’s triangulation was an accession to the corrupt anti-democratic ideas of conservatism, what would have happened if he refused to play?
Let's perhaps talk sometime. My focus is on Americans' lack of understanding of constitutional republican government, especially the ignorance of political leadership in this regard, and therefore our lazy, laissez-faire approach to our democracy over the past 50 years––notably removing checks and balances against the rise of demagogues and authoritarians to executive power. That's a death sentence. Here we are on death row, waiting, hoping, praying for clemency.
I'd love to talk sometime, best over beer! I'm very interested in the idea of government and how I believe Americans have lost the inspirational thread to the core concepts/principles in our constitution and democratic systems. I'm not an academic, so I can't argue the particulars, my approach is a) philosophical and b) psychological, and I'm picky about semantics, I like to try to make words speak my thoughts succinctly. I think you are in DC and I'm in CA, so the beer would have to be virtual, in Zoomland, I guess. Phones work too. Text me at (sevenoseven) 775-5889 if you'd care to start a conversation, if/when you have time.
Merry/Happy - Ted Bucklin, Sonoma CA
oops, wrong button….. in our more quotidian behaviors, like abiding the rule of law and defending democracy. Who doesn’t bend around these rules now and again, speed on the highway, include some fake expenses in our tax return? What Trump stands for to his core, and what makes him popular among the reluctant rule-followers among us (pretty much everyone) is his example of no-rules living. He not only refuses to follow rules, he intentionally and publicly broaches them and then manages to evade paying the price for his rule-breaking, not only the social price of disdain and judgement, but even for crimes of which he is obviously guilty. He is a paragon of anti-virtue. Everything he says and does is a pantomime of this message: rules are for suckers, and people who think the rules are unfair gather round him as moths to flame. The infamous “elites” of the coasts, whose supposed intellectual snobbery is a humanitarian crime against the common folk, are really just people standing up for the ethical frameworks (rules) that, until now, governed our lives. The disdain that normal, rational, patriotic Americans express for the people who have abandoned democracy and the ethics upon which it was formed is absolutely justified. Disdain used to be a sufficient social force to keep people in compliance, but Trump and his followers ignore, even celebrate the disdain, they eat it for lunch before tromping off to their next session of vandalism against American values.
I see this second comment now. I'm 100% in agreement. I should be writing soon about the most delightful collection of 185 letters ever written: Cato's Letters in the 1720s London. Some of your themes are expressed there with extraordinary passion and outrage.
Hi Eli, we tend to think of ethics in black and white, right and wrong, and there are those - against killing and stealing, etc - but ethics are also the softer rules that guide us
Eli, your best yet!
Just today, I was commenting to someone that our real problem in America is the end of civic virtue. I don't see the concept as quaint or archaic at all. The heart of a well-run government must contain people who genuinely believe in the betterment of all rather than the selfish furtherance of themselves or their friends. Sadly, right now, we have the cult of the strong man with his pathological drive to steal for himself and his friends and harm people he doesn't like. In other words, the opposite of civic virtue; in fact, Trump and his ilk make a mockery of the concept as weak and laughable. This confirms the weakness of their character and the essential nullness of their plans.
"Nullness of their plans." Does that suggest you are optimistic about our political future?
A book I just started by Heather Dutton Dudley (2020), “The Free and the Virtuous: Why the Founders Knew that Virtue Mattered,” speaks to the essential role of ethics in a republic. As to the consoling function of philosophy, this makes me think of Boethius’s “The Consolation of Philosophy,” where philosophy consoles him though he’s been sentenced to death by the Ostrogothian king.
Thanks for the book recommendations. Always appreciated. I'm going to seek out the first one.
Nothing new under the sun, and as Pogo observed, we have met the enemy and it is us. We shall persevere!
I'm interested in this idea. But how does it relate to an authoritarian demagogue in the White House?