Trumpist populism could easily linger longer than most people readily assume.
From where I am afar, it has always seemed as though America’s purported system of checks and balances just made it easier for corporate interests to takeover last century. Always enough votes for more illegals and more outsourcing. Never enough votes for single-payer healthcare, tuition free college, or to stop outsourcing.
Imagine if Trump was still crass and made some lewd comments, but his policy was essentially reversed. What if Trump had said “Open borders are fantastic. Tremendous. TPP is the gold standard, believe me! Outsourcing is the future. And the illegals here should be put on a fast track to citizenship with full voting rights and so on. Winning!”
Do you believe that Donald Trump would have won? He certainly would’ve been a media darling and supported by all the MNCs. People focusing on the man have no clue what’s going on. They just have absolutely no attachment. It’s obviously the policies. Now, the man being a guy like trump, basically a human megaphone, distracts from that a little bit, but smart people should be able to see beyond it.
Long ramble ahead: Abstract starts here. Essentially, what you are saying is that Trump is not some Pied Piper. He didn’t just show up and use his bombastic personality and his money to lead people in his direction. Trump in fact represents people much more than he leads them. I thoroughly agree. Did you know that there is an entire center at CIA dedicated to analyzing political leaders, and, more precisely, to determine whether they lead people or if they simply represent them and their their values? There is a huge difference. Trump is much more a representative than a new, novel leader. End of abstract.
I had the pleasure of meeting Dr. Jerrold Post a few years back by happenstance. He founded the Center for the Analysis of Personality and Political Behavior at CIA. His work, however, and in fact the center which he would come to found in the 70s, was predicated on the astoundingly accurate, earlier work of psychotherapist and analyst Walter Langer. Langer and his team were the ones who wrote the report on, you guessed it, Hitler. They wrote it for the OSS in 1943. By analyzing Hitler’s childhood very thoroughly and his interactions with masses of people, as well as interactions with women on an individual basis through a Freudian framework, they accurately predicted several things.
1. Hitler would become more reclusive as the war turned against him…in stark contrast to a character like Churchhill.
2. There would be an assassination attempt against Hitler by disaffected officers. Happened the next year in ‘44.
3. Hitler would become increasingly paranoid of even his most devout servants and aides. This would essentially paralyze the regime.
4. Hitler would most likely commit suicide as his grandiose self perception was shattered by losing the war (if not first assassinated or killed by bombing).
The report answered some important questions for the OSS at that time, obviously the middle of the war. However, years after the wars end, interest turned to Hitler the man before becoming a dictator, and as dictator for seven years before the war. Why was there such a lock and key fit between him and the population?
Some history revisionists tried very desperately to claim Hitler was a sort of Pied Piper. In fact, virtually all the evidence points in the opposite direction. Hitler was very much leading a nationalist revolution, and not so much causing it. Hitler in very important ways represented German and broader European values and beliefs of the time, rather than imposing his own.
Why the heck am I talking about Hitler? Well I can think of two good reasons. First, there have been some not so subtle comparisons made between Hitler and fascism and Donald Trump for the past 18 months. Hilariously, the very accurate Langer report and the framework which is used, if applied to Trump, comes up with radically different answers. In other words, it doesn’t work because he’s not Hitler. The two men, Hitler and Trump, could not be more different. Everything from one being tall and the other being short, to one being poor and the other being rich at birth, to one being a womanizer and the other being disinterested in sex and womanizing publicly (Hitler of course) due to a fit for Freud’s Oedipus Complex as well as the so called “castration complex” stemming from the violent abuse suffered at the hands of his father, and being pushed into the hands of his overly attentive mother.
Second, the lock and key fit between each man and their many millions and millions of respective followers, while in a different time and under very different circumstances, does shed some light on why they are such great representatives. In both cases we are talking about millions of people who have lost decent jobs, and have essentially had their psyche damaged. If there’s one similarity between the two it’s that the lock and key fit between each man and tens of millions of people can directly be tied to job loss, a sense of national deterioration and wanting to fix it, and basically damaged national psyche.
If you want to nip such overt public nationalism in the bud what should you do? Ironically you should pursue nationalist policies in the background so that there can never be one man claiming to represent all of the millions of nationalists in the country. Stop outsourcing their jobs. Get a grip on immigration. Stop protesting national icons and symbols (unless you really hate the place so much in which case we can get a GoFundMe started to move you out). of course you’ll quickly realize that most other countries on the planet enforce their immigration rules, simply having some cash in your pocket doesn’t mean you’ll be able to live anywhere else you’ll have to get a job, learn a new language, and/or marry.
That’s because those checks and balances have been perverted to do just that. You’ve got judges and city councils fighting against the law to actually help and keep illegals. Of course they don’t want some compromise where they can go ahead and have their own immigration system in their state, and we can have our own our own states elsewhere, and why not do the same for guns? No they want some heavy handed top down on that as well.
“Class lines are nothing new…but in many parts of America life, they have become far more distinct and visible in recent years…Yet they are hyper-aware of each other due in part to the ubiquity of social media and television. You can gawk at the lives of the privileged on Instagram, tap into the resentment of the white working class on Breitbart, and see the plight of the disenfranchised on Vice. This ready visibility has unleashed a range of emotions, including resentment, entitlement, envy, and despair – and it’s tearing America apart.” ( https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/12/the-lines-reshaping-america/547205/ ) So, does populism give salve?
In 1989 we jettisoned Communism … but not the Communists, rebranded as “Liberals”. You might have heard of our leading Communist agent, called Lech Wałęsa. Gen. Jaruzelski’s right hand man kept all records of Wałęsa’s dirty dealings as his insurance policy. Our Communists joined forces politically with a man called George Soros. The great plan was to sell 2/3 of the Polish economy to foreigners – which they did. Repatriated profits + cronyism + mass theft = a generation of misery. What they hadn’t planned for, though, was that the Internet would destroy the media stranglehold the old Commies had.
Mass emigration (2 million) and 500k children not eating meat regularly is still being hailed as a great economic success.
That’s changed with a dose of left wing politics – introducing some social welfare at last – and ‘patriotic economics’ (trying to avoid tax avoidance by polonizing the economy). It’s producing astonishingly good results – strong growth, a near-balanced budget and an end to extreme child poverty. Of course, gentle left wing economic politics is called Far Right by the world media.