How did Trump happen?

(First part, written very early this morning before going to work)

A rough day to be an American, for most Americans. And if the outcome had been different, it would have been a rough day to be an American, for most Americans. I am rather less of a loser this morning than I could have been, but still, Donald Trump as President-Elect is a pretty terrible birthday present to me from America.

(sigh) In the meantime, if you are one of my liberal friends or relatives: (1) love ya, really, no fingers crossed, and I know today is going to be awful and I feel for you, really and truly. (2) You and I are united in our desire to see America become a country where someone like Donald Trump is not a serious candidate for President. (3) This is so, so very important if we’re ever going to get back to where people like Donald Trump are not serious candidates: PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT YOU SAY WHEN EXPLAINING HOW THIS HAPPENED. Because the only reason we are now stuck with Donald Trump, is the way liberals have spent the last thirty years behaving.

(Full disclosure: I voted for Johnson, despite the fact that he seems to have a more or less room-temperature IQ, not being able to stomach voting for either Trump or Herself.)

Let me explain by first giving you an awesome counterexample, of somebody doing liberalism right (so far as liberalism can be done right). One of my daughters is about as liberal as they come; as far as I can tell the only problem she had with Bernie Sanders is that she suspected that he might be a touch too right-wing. (For those of you who don’t know her, that was comic hyperbole.) But she has gone out of her way to try to talk to me about my political views — and to do so respectfully — because, quoting her as accurately as I can from memory, “I sit around with my friends and they mostly hate conservatives. But I don’t want to hate conservatives. I want to understand them. You, Dad — pretty much everything you believe I think is evil, but I want to know how it’s possible for you to think that way.” Now let me tell you guys something and promise you I will never be more serious, or more certain, of anything in my life: if every True-Believer Liberal had that attitude, Donald Trump would never have gotten even 1% in any primary.

Watch what happens over the next few days, or actually over the next four years. Most liberals are going to say that Trump won because the people who voted for him are racist. A great many liberals, most of whom have been bragging for months about how excited they were to vote for Hillary precisely because she is a woman (so excited to Be A Part Of History!) will loudly proclaim (a) that there were lots of people who voted against Hillary because she was a woman and (b) that this was a Bad Thing and these people are evil and sexist because it is okay to allow gender to influence your vote but only if you are pro-vagina otherwise you are an Evil Person. (The ordinary run-of-the-mill liberal is many things but self-aware is not one of them.) All but unanimously liberals will ascribe Trump’s victory to “hate” of one form or another. Explanation after explanation after explanation is going to come from liberals in public and private life, and all of the people who aren’t True Believer liberals will be listening to you guys, and what they are going to hear overwhelmingly is, “My side didn’t win because the other side is Evil People and what we discovered today is that America has more Evil People than Good People Like Me.” There will be an incessant shrieking chorus insisting that it simply is not possible for any Decent Person to disagree with liberal orthodoxy. There will be little or no attempt to really understand what is going on in the minds of the people who disagree with doctrinaire liberals. There will be little or no attempt to really understand what is going on in the minds of people who find it odd to claim that it is evil to vote for a p***y-grabber who has been known to call women fat but fine to vote for someone who has for fifty years been the primary enabler of a serial predator and rapist and repeated guest of a sexual exploiter of underaged girls on said exploiter’s expeditions to the foreign jurisdiction that catered to his particular brand of evil. There will be little or no attempt to really understand what is going on in the minds of those who find it very strange when an acquaintance gets deeply upset at the possibility that Trump might have not paid his fair share of taxes but is not in the slightest troubled by the Clintons’ amassing of a $100 million fortune by influence-peddling and the shameless use of a “nonprofit” foundation for personal enrichment. That is to say, there will be little or no attempt to really understand what is going on in the minds of considerably more than half of the American people, who did not necessarily vote for Trump but who definitely refused to vote for Hillary. There will simply be an even more heightened primal scream of contempt for people who have committed the unforgivable crime of disagreeing with liberals and not letting liberals get their way. For the dominant perception that American non-liberals have of American liberals, is that American liberals deal with not getting their own way with about as tolerance for disagreement as Cardinal Ximenez and about as much maturity as the average two-year-old – but that American liberals can already do WAY more harm to people who disagree with them than the average two-year-old can, and that their open ambition is to be able to go full-Ximenez on the racist homophobic cisgenderist sexist fascist masses.

Essentially, the majority of liberals behave for all the world as though they hold the same attitude towards people who dare to disagree with liberals about morality and ethics and freedom that New England Puritans held toward people whom they had decided were witches, combined with the attitude two-year-olds have toward other two-year-olds who don’t hand over that toy on demand. Now there is nothing wrong with Social Justice Warriors’ thinking they are right; as far as that goes I think I’m right in most of my opinions; and the Puritans in Salem and the Calvinists in Geneva and the Inquisitors in Spain were all sure they were right in theirs. And of course Social Justice Warriors want to win and get things their own way, as do we all. To think that you are right is simply to be a human being who has an opinion; there’s nothing wrong with that in itself, nor is wanting to have things go the way you think they should go. But so far as I can tell, in the set of “Social Justice Warriors, the Peril, the Salem Puritans, the Geneva Calvinists, and the Spanish Inquisitors,” I’m the only member of the set who is capable of imagining the possibility that my views of what are right and wrong, could be in error. And so far as I can tell I’m also the only person in that set who doesn’t think the people who dare to disagree with me are Evil Persons Who Should Be Persecuted By Official Government Violence Until They Recant.

And what you guys have to understand is that THIS IS PRECISELY THE REASON WE ARE NOW STUCK WITH DONALD TRUMP AS PRESIDENT. (That, and the fact that the Democratic Party chose to run one of the most thoroughly contemptible people America managed to produce in the entire twentieth century, probably the only person in America who could have managed to lose to Donald Frickin’ Trump.) Liberals in public life unanimously, and liberals in private life often enough to have a definitely chilling effect on discussion, treat people who disagree with them as either morons or as something slightly worse than Nazis or most often both at once. As David Burge put it, “If you think Donald Trump says bad things about immigrants, you should see what MSNBC says about midwesterners.” And all the people liberals have been pouring contempt on for the last twenty years, just stood up and gave liberals the biggest Eff You of the twenty-first century so far. Donald Trump is not President-Elect today because of his political philosophy or his foreign-policy positions or because of his domestic policy platform. He is President-Elect today because of how liberals in general treat people who disagree with them. If you join in the chorus insisting that anybody who voted for Trump is a racist sexist homophobic white supremacist hate-filled deplorable fascist…(sigh) I take it you want him to be re-elected four years from now?

Look, it’s really pretty simple. Treat people with whom you disagree with respect and humility. Try to understand rather than hate. You ought to be doing that simply because it’s the right thing to do, both morally and prudentially. But if “it’s the right thing to do” and “I don’t want to make a fool of myself” isn’t reason enough for you, then for heaven’s sake do that simply because otherwise you will be treating people with contempt and arrogance. And once people figure out that you are contemptuous and arrogant and that you hate them without troubling to understand them…well, if you insist on making enemies, then you ought not be shocked when your enemies take delight in the lamentations of your women.

I’ll give you just one specific example. You remember when Donald Trump talked about putting a freeze on Muslim immigration? And when you all were horrified about how Donald was playing to people’s hatred of Muslims? Well, go back and look at the actual quote — he called for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.” And you are right, he was playing to hatred. But he wasn’t playing to hatred of Muslims. He was playing to hatred of “our country’s representatives.” He was playing to Flyover Country’s increasing resentment and hatred of the self-perceived elites who dismiss anything said by somebody who wears overalls or likes to barbecue as being “[fill-in-the-blank]ist.” And the overwhelming majority of liberals took the bait: he made a statement that was very clearly a slam at the incompetence of the people who lord it over the rest of us as if they were some sort of superior race when actually they couldn’t find their own butts with a GPS, an entire barbershop’s worth of mirrors and a pair of high-powered binoculars, but who respond to any criticism of their incompetence by calling those who criticise them “racist.” And how did liberalism respond? Why, by screaming about what a racist Islamophobe Trump and his supporters were — THEREBY PROVING HIS POINT.

Donald Trump figured out ahead of anybody other that Ted Cruz that at least half the country is very, very tired of being hated and sneered at by people whom they perceive as arrogant, self-righteous twits. His entire campaign strategy consisted, fundamentally, of getting liberals to prove that they hate him as much as they hate the more than half the country that dares to disagree with them on pretty much any political issue whatsoever. You find it mysterious, do you not, that tons of poor blue-collar workers looked at this brash inherited-wealth tool of a person who has never done a day’s worth of honest manual labor in his life, and said, “That guy is one of us”? But it’s really quite simply why they felt like Donald Trump was one of them. The people who hate them, also hate Donald Trump. The people who have been at great pains to make it clear that they hate and despise half of the American people, went to equally great pains to make it clear that they hate and despise Donald Trump, and the half of the American people they hate, noticed. At every opportunity Trump baited the liberal neo-Puritans and the Chamber-of-Commerce-owned Republican Party leaders to scream about how racist and sexist and hate-filled he was. Every time he said, “Please don’t throw me into that briar patch,” the militantly self-righteous elite obligingly said, “Hey, everybody, come watch us throw Donald Trump into the briar patch!” And what was the effect on the people who have learned by painful experience that no matter how politely they try to express their legitimate concerns about what is happening to their families and communities, they get called racist and sexist? Surprise, surprise, every time liberals and the Republican establishment screamed, “Racist! Sexist!” those voters said, “Hey, brother, welcome to the club.” The sad thing is that I think Donald Trump probably is actually a racist and I haven’t the least doubt in the world that he is a sexist pig whom I would never in a million years allow in the same room as any female relative of mine; but since your team’s visible representatives call literally everybody on earth who disagrees with them racist and sexist, hundreds of thousands of people who know they themselves get lied about by you guys more or less constantly, naturally assumed you were lying about Trump as well. Someday it’s possible that you might run across a story about a boy who cried wolf. It would do you good to read that story and ponder its lessons.

Your side (not you personally, my Facebook friend, for my Facebook friends list is pretty well-vetted and is largely a nasty-person-free zone) are well and truly hated by something close to half the country, who elected Donald Trump almost entirely because it was the most satisfying way they could think of to give liberals and establishment Republicans (but I repeat myself) a great big thumping raised-to-the-sky double bird. But you are not hated because you are women and they are sexist. You are not hated because you support LGBT rights and they are homophobic. You are not hated because you are a whatever-the-politically-correct-term-du-jour-for-not-white is and they are racist. They hate liberals because for most of my lifetime liberals have been treating them with contempt and arrogance and malice and abuse and venom. They hate liberals because it was precisely 0% of a surprise whatsoever to hear that Hillary Clinton thinks them “deplorable” and assumes that all her supporters agree with her. The dominant voices in the liberal community have incessantly accused these Americans of hatred whenever they have dared to voice disagreement with liberalism, usually with no evidence whatsoever that they were actually motivated by hate; and liberal voices dissenting with those accusations have been few and far between. The dominant voices in the liberal community have insisted that it is not possible for these Americans to disagree with liberal opinions or disapprove of the behavior of groups whom it happened to be socially fashionable at the time for liberals to defend, for any reason other than that they hate the people whose behavior and opinions they criticize. And that can only imply that those liberals cannot themselves imagine disagreeing with somebody’s opinion (as liberals clearly disagree with non-liberals) or disapproving of their behavior (as liberals clearly disapprove of non-liberals’) without hating them. Liberals have then done everything in their power to validate the implication that they hate anyone who is Not Their Kind, by seizing every opportunity to call anyone who dares disagree with them the nastiest names in the English language, and by spending the last thirty years making it clear that they hate and detest non-liberals and consider them subhumans who are, not just by implication but by open liberal accusation, in the same class as Nazis. Because, after all, you know, disagreeing with a liberal about the proper function of marriage in society…or about what God thinks of homosexuality…or about the degree of threat posed by global warming and the maximally prudent response to that threat…or about whether Obamacare does more harm to non-rich people in need of medical care than good…or about whether the nation’s police, as a factual matter, are generally a positive or negative force for the safety of innocent black people…or about whether INS bureaucrats are sufficiently capable of discerning between good and bad Muslims for it to be wise to allow tens of thousands of immigrants into America from a region of the world where an outright majority of the inhabitants think America is a bigger problem than ISIS…or about whether letting all men whether transvestite or not enter the same bathrooms as women will do more good to the 1% of the country who are transvestite men than it will do harm to the 50% of the country who are women vulnerable to exploitation by the considerably more than 1% of the country’s men who are aggressively heterosexual and eager for opportunities to sexually prey on vulnerable women, much less to women who have already gone through the trauma of sexual assault and find that trauma re-triggered whenever they or their daughters find themselves alone in a bathroom with a male stranger…clearly – clearly!! – disagreeing with liberal orthodoxy on any of these points is the moral equivalent of making lampshades out of human skin.

In the end, basically, they have decided they hate you back. So they took Donald Trump, who is one stolen bad toupee away from looking as much like a middle finger as it is very well possible for a grown man to look, and used him to be as obscenely rude to you as it is very well possible to be, and then yelled, “Take that, b****es!” Only, they weren’t just doing that to the liberals who hate them. They were doing it to the rest of us, too, even though we never did anything to them to deserve THAT.

And now I get four years with Donald Trump as President. So, you know, thanks for that.

I wrote the preceding this morning and then stopped because it was time to go to work. So far today my Facebook feed is largely proving my point. I have some liberal friends whose posts have been models of peacemaking and fairness, such as this one:

I supported Sec. Clinton over Trump simply because I believe that the President serves as an example to the rest of the country. Trump’s defects are so much more easily imitated than her arcane and high level transgressions (if indeed accusations are correct; I have my doubts). Anybody can be crude. Anybody can bully. Anybody can commit adultery and brag about it. Anybody can humiliate the disabled. His sins are so eminently replicable. (And, really, I would like to know how many abortions Trump has paid for over the years.)

Yet I know many good people who voted for him. I respect their motives and their judgment.

But the majority have been more like this one (who is usually a very nice person but was obviously very upset last night and said some things out of character, which is precisely why I am not sharing my friend’s name):

I am sick of people who spout hatred and find pleasure in the pain of others. I guess that is what white conservatives are all about…I do not want to have a single one of them show concern when my health falters because their votes causes me to lose my Healthcare because for the short time I had the ACA Healthcare, I was starting to think I might one day be back in a place of living. I hope that the Social Security system crumbles when they need it! You bitched because you didn’t have insurance, you told me it wasn’t fair that I got help and you couldn’t afford your policy. Well, I hope you are happy now.

There is no apparent comprehension of the fact that people might be distressed by the pain of persons who have chronic and severe illnesses and who had good coverage before Obamacare and have since lost it, or by the pain of people who can’t find decent jobs since Obamacare has driven huge numbers of employers to convert full-time jobs into part-time jobs. There is no appreciation of the fact that absolutely any approach to health care that can be devised will cause some people to gain coverage and others to lose it, or that a person could feel very deep compassion for my friend’s pain and yet consider that Obamacare does more harm than good. There are literally millions of losers under Obamacare, and their pain is just as real as my friend’s, and it is entirely possible that a person would support the abolition of Obamacare because they think overall the abolition of Obamacare would reduce the amount of pain Americans feel today from the difficulty of getting quality health care, in which case they would be trying to abolish Obamacare precisely because it distresses them to see the pain of others. But that’s not a possibility even to be introduced – oh, no, it’s that “white conservatives like seeing other people in pain.” What a deeply, deeply contemptible thing to say about another person simply because he disagrees with you on a question of political policy…but 100% of the people in this country who are not themselves doctrinaire liberals are resigned to the fact that if you disagree with the average liberal, he will feel not the slightest twinge in conscience in accusing you of being a monstrous and evil human being, the kind of person who “enjoys seeing other people’s pain.” My friend happens to be a nice person who ordinarily wouldn’t say such a vicious and nasty thing, who posted a first reaction to deep and bitter disappointment, and I neither hold it against her nor think anybody else should. But tens of millions of Americans have lots of experience with liberals who would say such things without the slightest twinge of conscience half a dozen times before breakfast…and that’s on days when the liberals woke up in a good mood.

Or take this article, which is a perfect example of the standard liberal combination of smugness, self-righteousness, contempt for those who disagree with them, and jackasinine unselfawareness. This idiot wants to explain to all of us who are not liberals that we do not understand why liberals are upset. We are, you see, very stupid and can never understand anything unless a liberal explains it to us. Now, the moment he says this, anybody in America who isn’t a liberal says, “Let me guess: you are upset because Evil People Won, and because YOUR political views, unlike those of the Evil persons who disagree with you, are not merely political views; they are Divinely Inspired Moral Imperatives that only Evil people could possibly disagree with, and whatever you have to do in your Crusade to impose them upon the unwashed infidels who dare to commit heresy against the One True liberal faith, is simply The Cause Of Justice, not politics; for politics, like hate, is What Those Other People Do. Are you telling me that this is not in fact why you are upset, and that there’s some other reason, which we have not hitherto suspected?” And then you read…

Here’s Why We Grieve Today

…in which he proceeds to tell us that the reason he is upset is that this is Not Just About Politics But Is Instead About The Fact That Hell Has Descended Upon America Because The Evil People Won. Um…dude, believe me, we already knew that’s how you felt. You’ve spent the last thirty years making that unmistakably clear. The fact that roughly half the country knows that you consider them to be on the intellectual level of goldfish and the moral level of Hitler is precisely why Trump got elected. It’s why Trump, not Cruz, won the Republican nomination despite the fact that Cruz was, clearly, a safer bet to make massive actual changes in Washington than Trump: Trump is and always was going to be a bigger Eff You than Cruz could ever have been. So you believe that all your political views represent The Triumph Of Good Over Evil and you despise all those who disagree with you as Evil? Dude, believe me, you didn’t need to tell us THAT. You and your kind made that clear long, long ago.

(If ever there was a single-digit-IQ article that begged to be Fisked, that article is one; but I have spent far too much time on this post already.)

If you are a liberal, then I suggest that you spend the next week stepping back from the fray and just watching how liberals talk about the rest of America. If you do that, and you are honest about what you hear and about what kind of impression the incessantly self-righteous and contemptuous and hostilely sneering droning of the liberal community is likely to make upon the 150 million or so Americans who are not themselves members of that community…well, then I don’t think you’ll have to be asking me any more, “How did this happen?”

P.S. After writing this I ran across this article. Obviously the folks at Reason have come to the same conclusion as myself. And I had to chuckle at Sally Kohn’s definition of political correctness as “being polite and having good manners,” given (a) my previous conversation with my son Kegan about what the term “political correctness” denotes in the overwhelming majority of conversations in which it is used, and (b) Sally Kohn’s ever-so-polite and ever-so-well-mannered tweets equating conservative Christians with the Muslim guy who shot up the gay nightclub in Orlando. Ah, yes, the polite and well-mannered liberal…the Donald Trump phenomenon was created primarily by people just like Sally Kohn, who I’m sure genuinely believes that she is polite and well-mannered and it’s all the other people who are full of hate.


2 thoughts on “How did Trump happen?

  1. I’m a bit confused by the central argument here, which I understand to be:

    “Republicans are tired of being called Evil racists/sexists, so they decided to elect the most offensively legitimately racist and sexist candidate they could find (despite the opportunity cost of passing up Cruz’s real change) just to give the metaphorical middle finger to liberals.”

    Ok, I agree that this may be an accurate statement of what happened, and I applaud that you were a conscientious conservative who voted Johnson instead of going along with Trump’s version of conservatism. . . . but assuming you’re right about the central argument, I’m not sure how that proves the secondary argument (re: “that Republicans are actually evil.”)

    I mean…. it’s not exactly wise, morally good behavior to respond to accusations that you’re evil by immediately doing the worst thing you can think of. That doesn’t prove the liberals wrong….quite the opposite. It’s like a child who misbehaves, and when confronted by it says “you think that’s bad–watch this!” and breaks a bigger rule.

    I’m very fond of conservatives such as yourself who can put together a collected, rational, argument regarding how their policies work (especially if it’s not grounded in prejudice and a desire to maintain white/male power)…. but that’s not the argument that Trump was making, and by extension not the argument that his followers voted for.

    Wouldn’t it make more sense to prove the liberals wrong about racism/sexism/homophobia/etc. by actually…. you know…. proving them WRONG, as opposed to just throwing an “Eff you” fit?

    If Republicans have real compassion for the disabled people with pre-existing conditions who will be stripped of all medical insurance when ACA is repealed, why aren’t they campaigning with an alternative plan other than just “repeal it!” (I mean, to be fair ACA was based on a Mitt Romney’s plan in the first place)… Almost every liberal I know is concerned about the fact that ACA has made health care less accessible for some people (except perhaps in a moment of passion such as you posted); but I’ve seen very little from Republicans addressing how we’d get health insurance to the poor. I mean, a tax rebate or a health savings account doesn’t come close to cutting it if you make $12k a year in disability and you’re on a medication like Aptiom that’s necessary for some epileptics to survive but costs $800/month for pills, plus the costs of doctor visits. And most people with severe pre-existing conditions become poor, because disability by definition makes it hard to work.

    But I’ve seen nothing from Republicans about how to actually help struggling disabled/chronically ill people — just calls for repeal because the largely healthy, largely middle class are paying more or otherwise having problems (which is a real thing too!).

    I don’t want to make this about health care only (though as a member of chronic illness groups I do have friends who will literally die if the ACA is repealed, and I knew people who died before it was passed from lack of health care)…. but you mentioned that as an example of liberals slandering republicans — and it’s a perfect example of where Trump’s party is failing to actually make a legit response.

    The other issue I’m seeing with this article is that a hypocritical tendency to dismiss the worst of the Trump supporters as fringe elements (he was endorsed by the KKK — surely we can agree that the KKK is in fact racist, right? That’s not just liberal hysteria). . . . but then you’re talking the most extreme liberal voices as the ones that represent how liberals treat republicans. It’s not as if terms like “libtard” and “feminazi” weren’t huge in conservative circles…. so it’s not only the liberals who invoke Godwin’s law or question the intelligence of their opponents. But you didn’t see the Democrats choosing the most extreme Social Justice Warrior in the public sphere to run for president in order to give an Eff You to the republicans. Compared even just to Bernie Sanders, Hilary is remarkably middle of the road. There’s something unhealthily malicious in intentionally trolling the entire country by running the worst candidate you can find and then voting him into the white house…. right?

    I guess the TL/DR here is: You’re admitting that Trump voters INTENTIONALLY proved themselves to be everything the liberals said they were…. so how does that make the liberals wrong for saying it? Even if the Republicans weren’t morally corrupt and evil a few years ago, following the exodus of well meaning conservatives such as yourself, and the influx of sincerely pro-Trump white nationalists… haven’t they become a self-fulfilling prophecy?

    • First of all, on this blog there is no such thing as TL/DR: the longer and more detailed a comment is, the better I like it. This is a GREAT comment, even though I disagree with a lot of it; thank you VERY much and most sincerely. In particular, I love the comment because the disagreements are I think USEFUL disagreements, in that they go to the heart of the difference between liberals and the rest of us (this is not meant to be critical of liberals — there has to be SOME difference between liberals and the rest of us or else the world “liberal” has no meaning), and to the very severe difficulties liberals have in understanding those who do not see the world as they do. Of course the rest of us also have very severe difficulties understanding liberals, who at least give the appearance of believing some obviously false and destructive things, and of behaving in what from the outside looks like a shamelessly hypocritical, mean-spirited, and indeed racist manner. But all that means is that every human being comes with a set of fundamental assumptions and preconceptions about the world, and it is extraordinarily difficult to step outside of our own preconceptions and understand another person from the perspective of his — though it is his preconceptions, not ours, that drive his perceptions and determine his motives. So the older and wiser you get, the less willing you are to explain why other people behave the way they do, if you find that your explanation involves “because they are evil,” and the more interested you get in ASKING them why they behave the way they do and generally taking their word for it.

      Ai-ya, if I let myself keep responding now…I can’t let myself start right now because I have deadlines to meet (I’m already at work and it’s only 6:45 in the morning). Great comment; deserves a generous response; I will get you one but it will probably be written on the plane to London this weekend.

      I’ll try in as few words as possible to give the gist of the main point of my response (but really this post deserves a long conversation and it’s a great pity we can’t find a pub someplace where a nice soft rain is falling outside and spend the whole day following the conversation wherever it goes):

      (1) The people I describe (which is not the alt-right), are people who have been constantly getting told by liberals, “You are a racist!” when they know very well that they are no such thing — by the definition of “racist” that they think is the only one that matters, namely, “a person who hates other people on the basis of race and who think people of different races should get treated differently on racial grounds.” (2) They have figured out, as has everybody else in the country who is not himself a liberal, that when a liberal calls you a “racist” it just means that he calling you a non-liberal, and usually congratulating himself on his moral superiority to you. (3) They are not saying, “I want to send an Eff You to liberals so I will find the most racist person I know and make him President.” They do not in point of fact think Trump is racist — I think they are probably wrong about that, but we are talking about their motives, and their motives are determined by their perceptions, not mine. They see Trump as somebody WHO IS ACCUSED BY SELF-RIGHTEOUS LIBERAL TWITS AS RACIST. And at this point, their automatic response to hearing somebody get accused of racism by liberals, is to assume that the accusation is FALSE. The Eff You they want to send to liberals, is they want to send to Washington somebody who is not a racist but who will make liberals’ heads explode because the liberals are sure that he is the Antichrist. I think they managed instead to send a racist to Washington; but that is not what they were trying to do, and the fact (as perceived by you and me) that they voted for a racist does not make them racist, anymore than the fact (as perceived by me and half the rest of America) that you Democrats voted for a lifelong compulsive liar makes you all compulsive liars. If you are trying to measure people’s character and motives, you have to look at what they THINK they were doing, not what you or I think they actually did.

      Now, I myself think what they have actually managed to do is send an actual racist to Washington. But that is not what THEY think they have done, and it is not what they were trying to do.

      This is my point about referencing the boy who cried wolf. No matter who the Republicans run for President, the liberal voices will scream “racist!” Mitt Romney, who I think is kind of an idiot but who is certainly one of the nicest and most generous people in American politics, was a racist and the second coming of Hitler. George W. Bush, who I think is more than just “kind of” an idiot but who the majority of Americans (including myself) think generally meant well, was a racist and a liar and the second coming of Hitler. John McCain, who I think is a pompous and self-righteous self-promoter and prototypical lifer politician, but who I don’t think cares tuppence about race, was a racist and the second coming of Hitler. In all of those cases the well-meaning Trump voter has looked at the people whom liberals have declared Hitleresque racists and said, “I don’t buy it; I don’t think those guys hate people of other races. I think liberals just get jonesed by calling people who disagree with them racist and fascist…I mean, they call ME racist and fascist more or less constantly and I’m a gay black Libertarian.” Then here comes Trump, and immediately liberals start screaming, “Racist!” And this time, I think you guys are actually right…but millions of Trump voters just rolled their eyes and said, “There they go again.”

      This is particularly true because the two issues that liberals pointed at and screamed “racist” over, were two issues where the Trump voter knows perfectly well that his own motives have nothing to do with race and is convinced that the only reason liberals think they do, is that liberals are pathologically obsessed with race and too severely intellectually and empathetically limited to conceive of the way non-racially-obsessed people’s minds work. Liberals seem to think all these white male rednecks want to keep brown-skinned Mexicans out of the country because they hate brown-skinned people and want to keep jobs for white people. That is because liberals, as far as the rest of us can tell, begin every social analysis by dividing people into racial buckets as the first and most critical step, whether race is actually relevant to the problem space and pragmatic solution range at hand or not, and they appear to assume that the rest of us share their particular pathological obsession. The Trump voter actually knows that on immigration, he doesn’t divide people into racial buckets at all, because racial buckets are for racists to care about and for the rest of us to ignore. Instead he cares about three things:

      1. Is this person an American citizen or not? If you are Hispanic and an American citizen, thumbs-up to you, my brother. If you are as white as the freshest of Scandinavian snowfalls, and you are not an American citizen, we may wish you well but we owe you nothing. (As a liberal you may disagree with that sentiment; but my point is that most immigration-issue Trump voters bucket people by allegiance, not by race.)

      2. Is this person willing to respect our laws? If you are Mexican and you have filled out all the paperwork and gone through the process and come here legally, welcome to America! If you are as blonde as an ABBA reunion tour and you snuck into this country illegally, get the @#$@ out.

      3. Does this person hate our country and/or imagine that his mission is to kill those of us who don’t share his religion if he can get away with it?

      Now none of this has the slightest thing to do with race, to anyone but liberals, to whom everything in the world always has to do with race. Non-liberals have concluded from long and painful experience with liberals that liberals look at immigration policy — as indeed they seem to look at all public policy — as if race is the only thing that matters; that the liberals see that the up-front result of enforcing immigration laws will be that a bunch of non-white people have to go back home; that they further imagine that one of the consequences will be that white people will get more jobs (actually the biggest beneficiaries of immigration law enforcement would be unemployed black people but liberals tend to be vague on pesky details of economic cause and effect). Then it looks to the non-liberal as though, seeing all that, liberals respond by saying, “No, no, no, wait, the non-whites should always win; but if immigration law is enforced then the whites will win; so if you want to enforce immigration law you are a r-r-a-a-a-c-i-s-s-s-t!” In other words, every time a liberal accuses a non-liberal of racism because they want to enforce immigration law, when the non-liberal knows perfectly well that his motivation is to ensure that there is a preference given to American citizens and to foreigners who respect and obey our laws, what this accusation tells the non-liberal is that the liberal is a racist. The non-liberal KNOWS that what he cares about is allegiance and law-abidingness and that he doesn’t give a damn about race. He furthermore has been convinced by liberals’ behavior and words that what liberals obviously care about is race race race race race race race race race and that they literally could not care less about allegiance and law-abidingness. So when the liberal accuses him of racism, his response is, “There for damn sure is a racist in this room and it for damn sure ain’t me.”

      Now I think that Trump did appeal to actual racist hatred, myself. But the thing is that most Trump voters just know they want immigration law enforced, and that they aren’t themselves racist for wanting immigration law enforced, and that if anybody speaks up in favor of enforcing immigration law they will be accused of racism…and they long ago tuned out the people who say, “Hey, that guy who wants immigration law enforced — he’s a racist!” People hear mostly what they want to hear. There was plenty of implied racism for the alt-right to grab hold of, I think; but most Trump supporters were more like, “Hey, he wants to enforce immigration law! Awesome! [Trump says ‘Mexican’ and in context supporter assumes he means ‘Mexican who is here illegally’ because Mexicans who are here legally are obviously not under discussion; liberal says, ‘Hey, listen that racist!’] Yeah, yeah, racism racism blah blah blah you call everybody that…man here is finally a guy who will actually enforce immigration law! I am so down with that!”

      And this is why I am saying that Trump is primarily a creation of liberals. If liberals hadn’t spent the last thirty years calling everybody who declines to walk in lockstep with their agenda “racist sexist fascists,” then when a real racist sexist showed up you could have said, “Hey, wait a minute — that guy’s a racist sexist!” And the liberals might have been listened to, then. But for thirty years liberals have been making it appear that as a group they don’t actually care to understand the people whom they disagree with, and that they don’t actually care why the people who disagree with them disagree with them, and most non-liberals have reached the conclusion that liberals apparently get some sort of emotional kick out of telling themselves that the people who disagree with them are evil whether it is actually true or not. This does not make most non-liberals think highly of liberals. It mostly trains non-liberals to ignore liberals when they run around calling other people Evil.

      These guys, in other words, weren’t trying to say Eff You by sending a racist to the White House. They were trying to say Eff You by sending to the White House somebody that LIBERALS THINK is a racist, since at this point the fact that liberals call somebody a racist is taken, by a very sizable percentage of the electorate, as proof that the person so accused is actually a NON-racist whom liberals are calling racist because he won’t go along with what is perceived as liberals’ race-driven anti-white agenda. This is, I think, a fallacious conclusion on their part; the mere fact that most of the people whom liberals like to call racist are no such thing, is hardly proof that NONE of the people whom liberals like to call racist are racist. The overwhelming majority of people whom liberals call “white supremacists” have far less interest in stacking the deck in favor of one race over another than liberals themselves do; but that doesn’t mean that a genuine really-truly swastika-tattooed neo-Nazi suddenly ceases to be a racist just because Al Sharpton calls him one.

      So, I think Trump is a racist. But I am only one vote and I am not the reason he is now President-elect, especially since I voted against him. Most of the people who voted for Trump are not racist (naturally there were racist alt-rights who voted for him just as there were white- and Jew-hating blacks who voted for Hillary, but that’s not what carried Pennsylvania). Of the non-racially-motivated Trump voters, most of them don’t think Trump actually is a racist (largely for the precise reason that liberals so loudly insisted he was one), and the rest think that they were faced between choosing a Trump who displays one form of racism and a Democratic Party that is itself racist to its very core, a Democratic Party that shamelessly welcomes people who openly express hatred of, and call for violence against, white people; so they figured they were choosing the lesser of the two evil racist alternatives. In the same way, lots of people think Trump is a contemptible sexist…but then they also think that the alternative the Democratic Party gave them was a woman who has spent the last half-century as the principle enabler of a serial rapist and sexual predator, a woman who is on tape openly giggling over her success in helping get off on a technicality a man whom she knew to have raped a fourteen-year-old girl. I myself can’t see how — though, not being a liberal, I am aware that this only means that I do not understand liberal thought processes, rather than its proving that liberals are evil — I can’t see how any person who cares enough about the victims of sexual predation to despise Trump for his attitudes toward adultery and p***y-grabbing and women who can be called fat, wouldn’t find the Clintons an order of magnitude more despicable. I think Trump is a pretty contemptible person but in the Vileness Stakes Bill and Hillary leave him in their dust. Now that is only my opinion and (a) it could be wrong and (b) it had no effect whatsoever on the outcome of this election. But there were literally millions of people in this country who looked at these two candidates and said, “Good Lord, you’re telling me the only way I can avoid voting for the Clinton Machine is to vote for this jerk?…Ai-ya, I can’t believe I’m having to vote for Donald Frickin’ Trump now.” (I think it was in Wisconsin that exit polls showed that 17% of the people who voted for Trump said they were scared of what Trump might do if elected but VOTED FOR HIM ANYWAY because they considered Hillary a worse option.) When liberals lecture Trump voters on what bad people they are for voting for a Bad Person like Donald Trump, they don’t respond by thinking, “Oooo, he’s right, I’m a bad person too for having voted for him.” They think, “Sweet mother of mercy, I am being lectured on morals by somebody who openly admits to having voted for Hillary Clinton.”

      Well, I didn’t manage to keep it short…I HAVE to get to work now. Looking forward to the conversation.

      Wait, wait, one other thing: “you are treating the most extreme liberal voices as representative” — oh no I’m not. I am talking about what comes across my Facebook feed, all day every day, from my personal friends, of whom many are liberal and many are Trumpers and many are like me saying “we are so hosed either way” but all of whom are nice and generally reasonable people when not talking politics (otherwise they wouldn’t be my Facebook friends). There is a family in Oregon whom I love and respect with all my heart, and they are delightful people, and if they deal with you on a personal level they are awesomely compassionate and courteous. But the day after the election the oldest daughter posted a genuinely awful post that was everything I’ve been describing here. And then her mother shared it because she thought it rocked. And then her friends started leaving admiring comments like, “Powerful words!” Indeed they are powerful; words exactly like that were powerful enough to deliver America into the hands of Trump. It was an objectively awful post, full of sanctimony and full of judgment being passed on people nobody in that family or their immediate social circle knows or understands; and the young lady and her mother thought it was a five-star post. But those two women are not the liberal equivalent of the alt-right. I am absolutely certain that there is no deliberate malice in them. They are delightful people whom I am proud to call friends, only, when they start talking politics they are casually slanderous, self-righteous, and contemptuous of those who are Other to them…and they appear completely oblivious to the fact. Again, as I mentioned in the main post, another friend — a very nice person under ordinary circumstances — posted the day after the election that “white conservatives just enjoy seeing people in pain.” If you tell me she is the liberal equivalent of the alt-right I will punch you firmly in the nose because she is nothing of the sort; she is a nice person generally who has been conditioned by liberal subculture to think that dehumanizing and insulting “white conservatives” is a virtue-signal rather than an act of uncharity and narrow-mindedness. You yourself have spent a long comment talking about how racist Trump supporters are on what I think is thoroughly inadequate evidence, but I do not have the impression that you at all mean to be a jerk or that you are an “extreme” liberal voice and certainly you are not on the moral level of the alt-right — otherwise I would not have said (and with all sincerity) that it was a “great comment.” It is ABSOLUTELY ACCEPTABLE in liberal circumstances to call people whom you do not know “racists” and “sexists” whenever they don’t do what you want them to, without bothering to talk to them to find out their real motives and real concerns, as long as they are conservatives. This is not fringe liberal behavior; it is mainstream. And it is why Donald Trump is going to be President.

      That doesn’t mean that conservatives don’t have their own issues. Nor does it mean that conservatives don’t have behaviors that are counterproductive and lead to bad social results. But the single biggest reason Donald Trump is President-elect, is the liberal eagerness to convince themselves that the people who disagree with them are Bad People, and the liberal shamelessness in broadcasting to the world both their mean-spirited conclusion, and the grotesquely inadequate evidence on which they generally reach it. And this post was not about, “What’s wrong with America?” It was about, “How did Trump happen?”

      Man, we really need a pub and some pints and a long rainy day…genuinely looking forward to your response.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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