Re: Geeks versus Politicians
Apologies for the slightly disjointed nature of the reply, there are a few distractions about this morning, so my chain of thought got a bit broken at times
> Look, *almost* a civil conversation.
To be fair, you were the one who started out casting aspersions.
> First, I used "projection" for the very purpose of demonstrating where what you are saying can lead.
See, now that's where this gets interesting as a conversation, because most people would say it's the ideology being espoused on Twitter and amongst (some) of Trump's supporters that has historically led down that path. I don't disagree that views in the opposite direction can lead that way too.
> How do we address the problem with the actual people at the source of the issue?
One of the major issues seems to be one of inequality - perceived or otherwise. It's not just financial, but let's focus on that for a minute as it poses an interesting conundrum.
Many, if not struggling, certainly feel they could (and should) be doing better financially than they are, and so they rail against "the system". Not undeservedly so, either.
But, if you look at the people leading the rallying cry, they tend to be people who profit off of that inequality rather than suffering under it. Aspersions about his ability to manage money aside, Trump's not exactly had to worry about where the next meal has come from - neither have talking heads like Shapiro.
So at the forefront of the "rebellion" you have people who've profited at the expense of others, and have only managed to get richer despite those others not having seen any material improvement in their position.
Basically, like all populism (left or right), it's a bunch of hot-air comprised of telling people it's "others" fault they're struggling, we'll help correct that, vote for us.
Reducing the effectiveness of that isn't simple - you need to fix the inequality, but that requires cooperation from people who'll lose out and will react by whipping a mob up against you (see Jan 6th)
Which leads us onto your next question
> Here's an interesting point to ponder; do you believe that Trump represents the source of making his "followers" believe and act as they do or do you believe that Trump is just a representative of what his "followers" already believed and has therefore given them a strong voice and platform?
Neither, it's an over simplification.
Trump is not the source of it - he's actively (and quite cleverly) exploited underlying disatisfaction and mistrust. He *has* also added to that, with things like claiming that the election was going to be rigged (and there are other examples).
He's a demagogue - he's a talent for speaking to people in a way that riles them up, as well as for making sure that's targeted. In some cases he's able to mix in just enough truth that the response has to be quite a nuanced conversation, leading his followers to believe the other side is hiding something.
I could probably write at length about how that's morally reprehensible and irresponsible (especially for someone claiming to represent Christian views) but I suspect you see that point.
> Also for the record, I live in the middle of "Trump Country". I don't have the luxury of sitting across an ocean and casting aspersions about something I'm not directly experiencing.
Granted I'm not sat in the middle of Trumpism, but I have spent nearly 5 years sat amongst Brexit - an issue with similar root causes, and whipped up by many of the same people who helped bring Trump to power in 2016 (Brexit in fact, being viewed as something of a practice run for them). Certainly built on at least as many lies - incidentally, your first retort "elitist pontificating" is something very reminiscent of the Brexit debate.
So, no, I'm not surrounded by gun-toting idiots yelling about how they should hang Pence for being a traitor. But I am, and have been, immersed in a situation that's being "managed" with many of the same tactics, and we've our own demagogue in power too.
> I even have family members that are supporters and, it's my opinion, that Trump represents what they already felt but I would be curious about how it's perceived from the outside.
In terms of outside perceptions, I'd say they've changed over time. Back when Trump was elected, there was almost a humour of "are they nuts?".
Over time, that changed - from an outside view it's gotten a lot harder to understand why people support Trump after the stuff he's done.
Then, you had the stuff leading up to the election, where it was clear he was trying to fiddle with it - deliberately knackering the post-office, Republicans screwing around with rules on mail ballot counting (and then subsequently objecting to those ballots because that's not how they're normally counted).
I'm generalising a bit here, but Americans are brought up with a heavy dose of exceptionalism (we're guilty of it in the UK too) - it couldn't happen here, the system will always catch it etc. So I think it's harder for someone amongst it to see it the way an outsider does - it clearly *was* happening, and it wasn't always clear that it'd actually get resolved properly
And in fact, it hasn't been resolved properly - Trump's whipped his base up enough that there's likely to be tensions for most of the first term.
But, my view on it is probably coloured a bit by Brexit. As a remainer, you start out wondering "*how* are they believing those lies? Of *course* there are going to be issues".
Then there's that ray of hope that maybe we won't completely fuck it up, and will get something that's worse but won't leave us too badly off. But there're still a lot of almost rabid leavers shouting about No-Deal, with a seemingly massive following of the Leave voting population.
Then those leaders change direction, and most of their base follows them.
Now, we've left with a deal that's demonstrably worse than the (still shit) deal we could have had, which in turn was orders of magnitude shitter than staying in the EU.
The people who's sensitivities were actively exploited to win the Leave vote are going to bear the brunt of the pain that's coming. The people who *led* them, however, stand to make an absolute killing. The media, unfortunately, won't fully report any of that though, and instead will likely help carry further propaganda about how times are hard, but stiff upper lip old boy, and we'll show those Frenchies our mettle.
Ultimately, if you voted Leave/Trump you carry some responsibility for what follows (in the sense that you enabled it). But, personally, I believe the majority of the fault lies with those who actively exploited inequalities to reach an outcome that would benefit them whilst only serving to worsen the inequality. It's hard to understand people who *still* support either project, but we also don't gain anything by labelling and alienating them.
To borrow someone else's phrase: Every racist voted Leave, but not every Leave voter was a racist.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
