He Said: Understanding the Trump Appeal (and Why He Shouldn't)

Look who's back! I was inspired this morning and motivated to coalesce my thoughts into something longer than 140 characters or someone else's words. So here goes. As ever, this is not intended to offend, but if it does I hope we can discuss why in a civil manner. Enjoy.

I just listened to a morning NPR report about the rise of Donald Trump in working-class areas, specifically Pennsylvania in this case. It was an earnest and fair piece that allowed each person encountered an opportunity to explain their frustrations and reasons for why they were beginning to find Trump appealing. But there is an underlying irony to their concerns and their belief that Trump can or will do anything to allay them.

Many pointed to the fact that rural areas like theirs are depressed economically because of how many manufacturing jobs have been exported. It’s an unavoidable reality. But it’s also something that Trump exploits as a businessman himself. Flip over one of his ties and check the label: China. Go to one of his construction sites, especially his condos in Florida: immigrant and undocumented workers. This isn’t difficult evidence to verify either. Go into a local department store and pick up one of his ties yourself. Google “Trump immigrant workers”. It’s hiding in plain sight.

One of the next most common statements is that Trump is an outsider and not a typical politician. He’s un-PC. I’m not exactly sure how being un-PC is considered a strength as a potential POTUS. Being crass and uncouth doesn’t exactly make someone more likely to negotiate arms treaties. But I digress. They are indeed correct that he’s not a typical politician. He’s not a politician at all. And while that sounds appealing, it carries with it the same undermining aspects as would me saying I intend to start my own rocket ship travel agency: I have neither the skills nor the appropriate network of connections to make it feasible. Likewise, Trump has no experience in foreign policy negotiations nor anything remotely approaching an experienced group of advisers. Just as important, Trump has bragged incessantly about being able to buy off politicians. He’s not a politician; he’s the puppet-master who owns them. The very guy that middle-America claims to hate is the very same person they’re embracing.

Others rightly pointed out that trade deals have disproportionately affected American manufacturing jobs. As I pointed out yesterday the bogeyman of trade deals, NAFTA, was conceived by a conservative POTUS and ratified by a predominantly GOP Congress. Clinton was ultimately the POTUS who signed it into law, but only after adding in clauses regarding worker safety and environmental protections. It was argued at the time that the trade deficit was a legitimate sacrifice given the overall bump the economy would receive. Which did happen. NAFTA has been a net positive with some obvious problems. Trump says he supports free trade but that we negotiated these deals poorly. How he intends to renegotiate them or cut them without consequences is never really explained. Yet another problem with Trump’s rhetoric that seems to go unchecked by those supporting him.

It’s interesting to consider, though, that NAFTA is a representation of America exporting democratic capitalism. We want other countries to embrace our love of buying and selling goods. But this will occasionally lead to offsets for both sides. Exporting manufacturing jobs to China because their labor costs less is pure capitalism. Perhaps we should revisit the notion that capitalism is intended to be an economic system not a political ideology.

Finally, I was struck by one of the last comments made during the series of interviews. One rural worker was lamenting that he felt abandoned by the US government and its policies. He said he felt like the white American worker had become “the minority. We’re being treated like second-class citizens.” I’m not sure I’ve got the time or energy to unpack the irony, naiveté, condescendence, and yes, white privilege (god I hate this term) that is contained in that sentiment. I’ve no doubt he truly feels this way. But I do doubt he has to endure the other harsh realities of actually being a minority in America. That doesn’t make his situation right or deserved. Far from it. But this solipsistic viewpoint is precisely what plagues us at the moment. And it’s what the GOP and Trump, first as a businessman and now as a politician (and make no mistake, he’s becoming a politician just like the others), have always preyed upon.

I feel sorry for these workers. They trusted a system that betrayed them and now comes along a snake-oil salesman who says he has the tonic for all their woes. I’m sure it’s tempting. But I’m also on their side when I point out that Trump offers nothing but false promises in the form of vulgar populism. And I’ll continue to do so until he’s forced from this arena for good.

He Said: First-World Problems

I’m just riffin’ here so fact-check the minutiae as you see fit but I’m gonna stand by the larger points.

In a world that’s existed for millions of years, of which we’ve been present and accounted for maybe a fragment of a percentage, we’re infants. So I’m somewhat heartened when I come across a genuine first-world problem. And by that I do not mean figuring out how to hold one’s place in line during work hours while waiting for the new iPhone to go on sale. (In big cities I’m assuming this is a boon to the street economy.) No, I mean truly philosophical, first-world problems. The Washington Redskins. The name itself is offensive to a considerable number and variety of people. But it’s also a great source of pride for another, very specific, group of people. And therein lies a truly modern (progressive?) conundrum. Much like Scotland’s recent referendum on rebellion and secession, the debate regarding the name and mascot of the Washington, D.C., franchise of the National Football League (trademark, etc.) is, and largely has been, a civil one. And that is something that can only exist somewhere that has the freedom to argue the meaning of words because society has accepted a basic understanding of humanity.

Don’t get me wrong, the good ol' US of A still struggles with racism, classism, poverty, and its own unique version of the caste system. But these things are not mutually exclusive. Jefferson is the architect of modern representative-democracy yet owned slaves and profited greatly from them. Such duality is a blessing and a curse, but our best intentions return to our principles and we strive to actualize them in the face of our own shortcomings. We’ve always been our most progressive when facing the demons of our own creation. We rejected the unjust yoke of one king to beget a nation that raped the indigenous kings and queens of another; we perfected slavery and servitude in pursuit and deliverance of the world’s greatest bounty, and then paid penance (gained redemption?) through united struggle to overwhelm forces who would yoke the world entire; and we continue to cloak ourselves in a hero’s cape while subduing the modern-day comic book villains.

But to be able to wrestle with such foes is a testament to our progress. There are always dragons to slay, but there is a certain refreshing appeal to knowing that we’ve reached an existentialism that includes the branding of an epithet and the arguments for and against that follow. Washington didn’t mean to offend when creating their mascot because offending wasn’t a consideration at the time. Now that it is, more history has passed to give merit to those who have known nothing but pride in a name.

The prudent thing, by the mere fact that this is a thing - a discussion - is of course to change the name and make serious hay (that is, $$$) from the tedious process that entails. For surely even those who will claim offense to having the name changed will remain supporters, versus the ongoing quagmire of being known as a racially insensitive, backward, racist organization in a league that already tacitly condones rape, murder, adultery, and spousal abuse. Then again, maybe calling themselves the Redskins for as long as they possibly can is the best idea. If after all the other bullshit that’s gone on in just the past few months alone doesn’t impact ratings and viewership (yeah, check your stats, kids), continuing to offend a statistically insignificant portion of said viewership (or, PEOPLE) isn’t going to make them change their minds.

But there’s a discussion going on. And in a world that sometimes seems hell bent on destroying itself, that alone is perhaps something to inspire us further onward.

He Said: The Weeknd "Trilogy"

It’s been a long time since I’ve listened to an album from start to finish; even longer since I was inspired to do so by an artist I was unfamiliar with. Till the other day. That’s when I heard “Wicked Games” by The Weeknd. I heard the end of the song on the radio, grabbed Shazam to figure out what it was, and then proceeded to Spotify to get the whole story. That whole story is “Trilogy”, the 3-part compilation of previously released mix tapes now lovingly remastered and crafted into a 3-hour narrative describing an evening’s (or perhaps a life’s) descent into debauchery. 

It’s fitting that it unfolded this way because Abel Tesfaye is most definitely an artist fully representative of the post-modern technological society we live in. His music somehow simultaneously captures the immediacy of emotion with which we all live and the soul-crushing weight of solitude that technology brings with it. The Weeknd conveys a manipulated, deep, dark psyche that is probably relatable to at least the previous and current generations. A young adult thrust into a world of heavy drug use, lack of privacy, anonymous/multi-partner sexcapades, and the regret that follows all of those behaviors.

This album is dense; layered with eccentric samples and at least one complete cover (a ballsy yet almost unerring version of Michael Jackson’s “Dirty Diana”). If the unfolding of all 3 albums is as intentional as “Trilogy” would have us believe, then The Weeknd may be a musical genius in the making. The production value is amazing (helped ably by some of the current best in the industry). Drake and Clams Casino pop in for the occasional verse, but it is definitely Tesfaye’s hauntingly beautiful voice that is on display. Half-singing/half-rapping through most tracks, there is a definite trip-hop influence (for lack of a better term), though it is melded with the chopped-and-screwed vibe permeating so much hip-hop today. Psychedelic soul? Fucked-up funk? I’m not sure there’s an apt genre in which to squeeze this.

Make no mistake, this album is dirty. I mean wake-up-in-the-gutter dirty. And if you’ve ever woken up wondering what you did last night, where your money is, why everyone seems to hate you, and you have no idea where you are…

Don’t say I didn’t warn you.

He Said: Friday Ramblin'

Late 20th-century America advanced rapidly. Technology allowed ideas and words to move faster than previously imagined. It brought the world together in a way that seemed impossible. The world indeed got smaller while simultaneously expanding. Anything was possible. So why did all the same problems remain? Or worse, get exacerbated?

Which problems should have been solved by such fast-moving and groundbreaking means of communication? Shouldn’t international crises have been nearly eliminated? Sure, we couldn’t control the weather, but our responses should have been so swift and coordinated as to make anything past “first response” a simple matter; if you weren’t injured or killed by the initial wave/blast/storm, our communication and mobilization resources should have made search and rescue a simple matter. But we know otherwise. Humankind always manages to let itself down at crucial moments. Typically due to bureaucracy. Just ask people in New Orleans. Or Haiti.

So where are we now? A nation brought to its knees by debt and cultural division. Freedom, somehow, means wildly different things to many different people; the rallying cry of “limited government” now used as more of a blunt object with which to beat the other side – “limited” to being used against our enemies. Neither side (for we’ve become incapable of acknowledging a third, fourth, or more options) is without blame, though one seems to wear it like a badge of honor so ingrained is it in their mindset. The other plays half-assed, publicly not quite sure if it likes playing by the rules while secretly not. Carter wasn’t corrupt, just too idealistic to be effective. Reagan believed wholeheartedly in a very bad idea. Bush was so hard-wired into the military-industrial/intelligence complex that politics were an after-thought. Clinton was a genuine leader but too flawed to be a great one; post-POTUS life is far more amenable. Dubya was a knee-jerk reaction to Clinton’s antics and Gore’s woodenness; a fearful response to “too much freedom”. This has all culminated in Obama, a man who is somehow perceived to be both an extension of Bush and his party’s short-sighted neo-conservatism and the first giant step toward socialism. Nuance has never been an American trait.

So where are we now, really? Well, we have a POTUS that has let down his core constituency yet can point to a laundry list of legit accomplishments; a POTUS that has seemingly alienated one half of the country with one policy that they oppose on principle in spite of the fact that it will benefit the majority of them; a POTUS who, no matter how hard he tries to unite, will be a divider. Nuance has never been an American trait.

Which leaves us with… a GOP field dominated by the least offensive character, who also has no charisma and no leadership ability. One man followed by a shrinking field of clueless, power-hungry lifers fighting for scraps. Some are well-intentioned but bereft of forward thinking; others are legitimately dangerous to our collective future. So BHO will likely see 4 more years. And that isn’t dangerous, but it isn’t inspiring either.

Steve Jobs was both an asshole and a visionary (as many so often are), and he wasn't afraid to be either when the moment called for it. He saw a path toward enlightenment that happened to be littered with consumer-invention. The perfect combination of personal freedom and collective involvement. His technology could be yet another tool to make the world smaller and simultaneously larger, infinite. And we’ll still let ourselves down very soon. Nuance has never been an American trait.

He Said: Why We're Like This

"Why are you like this?"

"Like what?"

"Like how you are."

I've been having this type of conundrum a lot lately. Nearly everyone you encounter would agree that things don't seem to be going all that well in our country these days. Maybe that's an ever-present existential complaint because there's always something going wrong. But while the summer kicks off with wildfires, droughts, a potentially worse-than-usual hurricane season, GOP debates with less-than-impressive candidates who can't seem to take advantage of a sitting president with low approval ratings and a tottering economy, the usual raft of civil wars plaguing Africa and the Middle East, our news media has kept us focused on... a Weiner. And while it can have been expected for this to have grabbed our attention for a day or so, the fact that it's been such a story for over a week now is really a bit of insight into the current American psyche. And clearly we need a distraction.

So what does it mean? Why, when so many people are willing to share a decent and informed opinion, do we so consistently return to such ludicrous minutiae? Why, when the loudest cries from both liberals and conservatives seem to revolve solely around how much intrusion into our lives we're willing to permit the government, do we always become rapt by the most extreme voices filled with nonsense? Why are we like this?

"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals..."

Does this explain it? Have we simultaneously become a country of individuals... yet so desperate to be a part of something that we're now settling for the easiest solution? Fearful of every bogeyman that the media throws at us. Smart people make bad decisions all the time. But that doesn't make them evil, or even dangerous. Well, except to themselves.

Why are we like this?

Like what?

Like how we are?

He Said: I don't write enough! Got any ideas?

So you'd think that being stuck in the house for days on end due to a recent surgery and then Icepocalypse 2011 would inspire me to some more prolific writing. Surely there's something of substance going on. But I'll be honest, I'm just beat down by politics at the moment. The Colts were unceremoniously dumped from the NFL Playoffs (though we did get an entertaining Super Bowl for the neutral fan). IU basketball barely has a pulse. Manchester United suffered only their first loss of the season last weekend, but even their likely march to multiple trophies has me uninspired today. Let's face it, between sports and politics, those are the things I focus on the most - especially during the winter, when there's little else to do. So maybe I should open the floor to suggestions. Anybody got any topics they'd like analyzed by a good writer with time to kill? Anyone... Bueller?

If not, or in the meantime, check out my friend Sly's blog: chicoandsophiesmommy.blogspot.com
Sly (not really her name, btw) and I met through her husband, who plays soccer with me. And we all traveled to South Africa for the World Cup this past summer. Hmmm... maybe I could write about that ;)

He Said: Bitching about bitching

Another Monday, another set of sensationalistic headlines and the requisite cast of talking heads offering their sound and fury, yet offering us nothing of substance. So what's on today's agenda?

- Elena Kagan has been put forth by Obama as his nominee for the Supreme Court. Cue the GOP and their right-wing minions in the media and blogosphere to begin a new wave of contrarianism. Then cue left-wing apologists taking the bait and addressing the nonsense brought up by the right in the first place. This is already old and we haven't even had the first attempt by the GOP to block her confirmation. Honestly, I don't know a thing about this woman other than the blurbs that accompany the headlines, so it's possible she's the best nominee possible... or she could be a rube with no idea how to conduct herself. Who wants to bet that neither will be the issue being discussed on cable shows.

- BP failed to stem the flow of oil in the Gulf, so now they are reaching out to every engineer on the planet in the hopes that someone will have an Einstein-level solution. Again, cue each side's activist groups shouting loudly about everything except what matters most: fixing the problem. Yes, we'll get left-wingers screaming about how this is the failure of large, oil companies to care about the environment, and right-wingers screaming about how this is actually not a big deal and left-wingers are blowing it out of proportion in order to make political hay. Irony. I guess we need a giant rubber band.

- The whole Arizona immigration law thing. This just boggles my mind. How can two sides ostensibly agree that there is a problem yet be so far apart on what constitutes an acceptable solution? It is just as egregious a failure to ignore the concerns of those who live in Arizona and have to deal directly with this issue as it is for those same people to use a ridiculous "nuclear" option. But we're apparently just a nation of extremists now. Being moderate and logical in thought just won't do. No, it's about who can shout loudest and appear to be most aggrieved.

Black is white; white is black; Democrats are hard-liners; Republicans are revolutionaries; liberals are hawks; conservatives are victims; moderates are crazy; extremists are rational. And I've contributed nothing; no answers. Welcome to Monday!