‘The Dangerous Acceptance of Donald Trump’, Fear-Mongering Polarization in the American Political Landscape, and an Author’s Note

On May 20th, 2016 The New Yorker published “The Dangerous Acceptance of Donald Trump”, a scathing editorial by Adam Gopnik. I wrote a review of it in my Notes app on May 27th, with an idea that maybe I’d start a blog someday. Now that Trump is officially the President-Elect, the time seems appropriate to launch this blog.

Gopnik cakes his article with the influence and sure fire frenzy of fear. The third paragraph reads “(Trump) announces his enmity to America by word and action every day. It is articulated in his insistence on the rightness of torture and the acceptable murder of noncombatants.” without the faintest irony. It continues with “It is self-evident in the threats he makes daily to destroy his political enemies, made only worse by the frivolity and transience of the tone of those threats. He makes his enmity to American values clear when he suggests that the Presidency holds absolute power, through which he will be able to end opposition—whether by questioning the ownership of newspapers or talking about changing libel laws or threatening to take away F.C.C. licenses.” as if this “enmity” has never been smacked by the lips of dozens of Presidents throughout the 20th century. Torture has been executed by the United States for decades, signed off by presidents from both sides of the aisle. Ironically, Wartime (and peacetime) atrocities have been enacted, automatically vindicated and righteously defended by our corrupt political system since America became the world superpower. To read Trump’s ascendancy as an unparalleled spiral into a totalitarian state is simple fear mongering.

This is not to say Trump’s words are not to be feared, or that his commitments to irrationality not to be ridiculed (I really, really don’t support him), but that focusing on the spectacle of his candidacy as the destruction of democracy is woefully ignorant. The state is thoroughly -contemptuously- anti-democratic. The democratic primary delegate debacle being prime, recent evidence. However, to be sure, we must only take a simple look at the security of money, dual party dominance, and the thorough division of the populace into winnable demographics. These are incontestable observations.

I respect the New Yorker most of the time. Many articles are extremely powerful, interesting, and eloquent. Most of the time. In other cases, the New Yorker represents a growing demographic built around its own courageous endowment of “logic” upon the masses. A dutiful, smug array of intellectuals clamoring over to each other’s master’s degrees to proclaim their interpretation of liberalism as that which “the Government SAYS it is STUPID”. Never once is the call centered around understanding the latest injection of the political system with nightmarish, Orwellian statism. Never once is the message articulated into how and why we arrived at such a convoluted juncture. Never once is the analysis about more than paltry, dismissive points that ignore the elephant in the room that is what little sway the people actually have on the electoral system, the declining percentage of voters, or the reckless extremes elected officials, polls, NGOs and super pacs take to divide and conquer the electorate. But with stinging efficiency, the intellectual class, as people of pompous egos, of brash ignorance to their own hypocrisy, they declare the new fear. This election cycle, the fear market belongs to the left.

Throw in the obligatory conservative news acquiescence, the conspiracy nut, and the “Republican dirty-tricks maven” Roger Stone, and you have an instantaneous recipe for leftist superiority. Surely, none of those things would impart a rational dialogue of anything! We intellectuals understand the bigger picture, and that bigger picture definitely has to do with zeroing in on what a racist kook this guy is!


Author’s Note: The tone set by any blog should revolve around its author’s tenacity to articulate his/her ideas in a most concise, intelligible manner. Don’t be fooled by what I’ve decided to call “The Nebulous Hour”. Though this first post is political, only its non-conformist tone will set the standard for future posts. My goal here is to project my personal conclusions and understanding of a world that has increasingly become more difficult to understand, to dutifully report on how we must all now grapple with the Age of the Internet, and most of all, offer a perspective entirely lacking from the Mainstream in an array of subjects I find interesting. In so doing, it is my hope I grow as an intellectual, develop a better, more humble, awareness of my personal interests, and hopefully gain some followers on the way.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s