You’re absolutely right, and that was very well-written to boot. But it’s not the part that perplexes me. I likely just did a poor job of explaining myself.
I fully expect his intellectually and/or psychologically compromised supporters to fail or refuse to recognize his glaringly obvious insanity. As you note, he affirms their prejudices and tells them that the condemnation they so deservedly receive is actually some sort of evil conspiracy, and they grovel at his feet, lapping it up.
But that just accounts for a portion of his supporters and none of his opponents, and it’s that remainder I wonder about - all of the people who are certainly rational enough to recognize his glaringly obvious derangement for what it is, but somehow just don’t, or won’t.
I have this recurring experience in which I read an essay or article from some more or less neutral site or even an oppositional site in which someone relates something that Trump said, then parses and analyzes it, as if it’s a legitimate statement of supposed fact rather than the deranged ranting of someone who’s painfully obviously profoundly mentally ill, and I can’t even see how they managed to make it that far - how they didn’t just stop halfway through relating whatever it was he said and throw their hands up and say, “This guy is a fucking lunatic!” Because he so blatantly obviously is.
I linked to the specific part of the video that explains the particular point I want to make, but I recommend watching from the beginning anyway. Also, the extra-short TL;DR is basically that the Democratic party is structurally predisposed to continually give the benefit of the doubt and assume good faith, even when it is not only blatantly undeserved but also being actively exploited by their opponents.
When things like this don’t make sense there is a tried and true method that usually sheds some light on it: Follow. The. Money.
I don’t claim to have some knowledge of some deep state actors or even understand the nuances of late stage capitalism. But, I do understand some writer, reporter, or publisher not wanting to have to explain to their family that they’re moving to a van down by the river because they wouldn’t write an article that didn’t explicitly call bullshit on some billionaires people-based checkers game. It is easy to compromise on a story, then another.
That’s just my hypothetical for this comment, but extrapolate to everything else we’re seeing that just seems batshit insane and yet is being reported on as nothing more than slight variations on business as usual or two sides with slightly different ideological views. You start to feel like the only sane person in the asylum and it drives you mad.
That’s more or less the theory I keep coming back to, but I can’t even entirely wrap my head around that one. It’s sort of like a really complex conspiracy theory in that it presumes a particular contrived course of action from seemingly too many people.
I can absolutely imagine some number of writers, editors and publishers self-servingly treating the obviously insane blathering of a lunatic as if it’s legitimate just to further their own careers, and I can absolutely imagine some additional (and likely greater) number of them doing so to protect themselves from retribution. I can even imagine some number who are themselves insane in a way that aligns enough with Trump’s insanity that they treat him seriously sincerely.
But all of that still doesn’t seem enough to account for the near-universal failure to even comment obliquely on how deeply mentally ill Trump so obviously is. Just as with a complex conspiracy theory, I can see the possibility on a limited scale, but it all seems to fall apart if one tries to expand it out to the scale that would seem to necessarily be the case.
And yeah - I keep ending up feeling like the only sane person in the asylum.
You shouldn’t underestimate people’s tendency to just do what they’re told and not rock the boat. Network head likes Trump interviews because it generates views, which attracts advertisers. Trump is a petulant child and will refuse to do interviews with any network that points out he has the mental capacity of a child. So the network head mandates that nobody is allowed to question Trumps mental state for fear of him refusing future interviews. Since their boss said so, the network talking heads just go along with it.
As for the politicians, they can’t recalibrate to the reality that is Trump. They’re used to playing political chess with their equals and along comes the pigeon known as Trump to walk all over the board knocking pieces over and shitting everywhere. They literally have no playbook to deal with him. Normally this would be where the “referee” steps in which depending on context would be a debate moderator, the Supreme Court, or Congress, but the debate moderators won’t touch him because of the previously mentioned reasons, the Supreme Court has been stuffed with puppets that have a vested interest in protecting him, and Congress is so deadlocked and dysfunctional they can’t even pass legislation with bipartisan support nevermind impeaching him.
Trump is the perfect storm of everything the US political system was never designed to counter. Every single check that was supposed to prevent this sort of thing has either been subverted or just plain failed because the supposition it was built on was faulty. He has highlighted that far too much of the US political apparatus has functioned purely by convention and concepts of fair play and as soon as someone came along that didn’t give a shit about any of that it all crumbled.
Well…
You’re absolutely right, and that was very well-written to boot. But it’s not the part that perplexes me. I likely just did a poor job of explaining myself.
I fully expect his intellectually and/or psychologically compromised supporters to fail or refuse to recognize his glaringly obvious insanity. As you note, he affirms their prejudices and tells them that the condemnation they so deservedly receive is actually some sort of evil conspiracy, and they grovel at his feet, lapping it up.
But that just accounts for a portion of his supporters and none of his opponents, and it’s that remainder I wonder about - all of the people who are certainly rational enough to recognize his glaringly obvious derangement for what it is, but somehow just don’t, or won’t.
I have this recurring experience in which I read an essay or article from some more or less neutral site or even an oppositional site in which someone relates something that Trump said, then parses and analyzes it, as if it’s a legitimate statement of supposed fact rather than the deranged ranting of someone who’s painfully obviously profoundly mentally ill, and I can’t even see how they managed to make it that far - how they didn’t just stop halfway through relating whatever it was he said and throw their hands up and say, “This guy is a fucking lunatic!” Because he so blatantly obviously is.
That’s what I don’t get.
I think the good ol’ Alt-Right Playbook can shed some light on that one.
I linked to the specific part of the video that explains the particular point I want to make, but I recommend watching from the beginning anyway. Also, the extra-short TL;DR is basically that the Democratic party is structurally predisposed to continually give the benefit of the doubt and assume good faith, even when it is not only blatantly undeserved but also being actively exploited by their opponents.
When things like this don’t make sense there is a tried and true method that usually sheds some light on it: Follow. The. Money.
I don’t claim to have some knowledge of some deep state actors or even understand the nuances of late stage capitalism. But, I do understand some writer, reporter, or publisher not wanting to have to explain to their family that they’re moving to a van down by the river because they wouldn’t write an article that didn’t explicitly call bullshit on some billionaires people-based checkers game. It is easy to compromise on a story, then another.
That’s just my hypothetical for this comment, but extrapolate to everything else we’re seeing that just seems batshit insane and yet is being reported on as nothing more than slight variations on business as usual or two sides with slightly different ideological views. You start to feel like the only sane person in the asylum and it drives you mad.
That’s more or less the theory I keep coming back to, but I can’t even entirely wrap my head around that one. It’s sort of like a really complex conspiracy theory in that it presumes a particular contrived course of action from seemingly too many people.
I can absolutely imagine some number of writers, editors and publishers self-servingly treating the obviously insane blathering of a lunatic as if it’s legitimate just to further their own careers, and I can absolutely imagine some additional (and likely greater) number of them doing so to protect themselves from retribution. I can even imagine some number who are themselves insane in a way that aligns enough with Trump’s insanity that they treat him seriously sincerely.
But all of that still doesn’t seem enough to account for the near-universal failure to even comment obliquely on how deeply mentally ill Trump so obviously is. Just as with a complex conspiracy theory, I can see the possibility on a limited scale, but it all seems to fall apart if one tries to expand it out to the scale that would seem to necessarily be the case.
And yeah - I keep ending up feeling like the only sane person in the asylum.
You shouldn’t underestimate people’s tendency to just do what they’re told and not rock the boat. Network head likes Trump interviews because it generates views, which attracts advertisers. Trump is a petulant child and will refuse to do interviews with any network that points out he has the mental capacity of a child. So the network head mandates that nobody is allowed to question Trumps mental state for fear of him refusing future interviews. Since their boss said so, the network talking heads just go along with it.
As for the politicians, they can’t recalibrate to the reality that is Trump. They’re used to playing political chess with their equals and along comes the pigeon known as Trump to walk all over the board knocking pieces over and shitting everywhere. They literally have no playbook to deal with him. Normally this would be where the “referee” steps in which depending on context would be a debate moderator, the Supreme Court, or Congress, but the debate moderators won’t touch him because of the previously mentioned reasons, the Supreme Court has been stuffed with puppets that have a vested interest in protecting him, and Congress is so deadlocked and dysfunctional they can’t even pass legislation with bipartisan support nevermind impeaching him.
Trump is the perfect storm of everything the US political system was never designed to counter. Every single check that was supposed to prevent this sort of thing has either been subverted or just plain failed because the supposition it was built on was faulty. He has highlighted that far too much of the US political apparatus has functioned purely by convention and concepts of fair play and as soon as someone came along that didn’t give a shit about any of that it all crumbled.