The Radical Honesty of Trump

 

                    

I am starting to develop a grudging admiration of Donald J. Trump for the animal cunning he displays in gas lighting an entire nation. Media outlets have documented however many thousands of lies the President has told yet no one seems to have noticed that in the midst of all this prevarication he has displayed not overall mendacity but stunning, even brazen honesty. I have concluded this from turning off the commentary and simply listening to the man and reading his tweets. Trump is not lying to the American people at all: in fact he is fully open and honest about who he is and what he is doing and people, for whatever reason, are having a hard time hearing him. This started, I suppose, with the Access Hollywood tape where Trump openly admitted to what many women have accused him of: sexual assault. It continued with the Russia investigation which Trump fired James Comey to obstruct as he himself said on national T. V. Did Trump accept illegal foreign aid in the 2016 election? Perhaps, perhaps not, but he clearly indicated he would accept it if it was offered. He made his underlying criminal intent crystal clear. Moreover on TWO occasions at least he directly solicited such aid including a solicitation of aid from China on the white house lawn. Moreover, Trump did the very same thing he was accused of doing in the Russia investigation with the president of Ukraine which his own personal lawyer AGAIN blurted out on national T.V.

This honesty extends to others in the administration: were children held in deplorable conditions on the Mexican border? I myself heard with my own ears a government lawyer (a certain Ms. Fabian) admit openly that they were but assert that the Government was not, by a strict interpretation of the law, obligated to give basic care such as toothbrushes. Other persons said OPENLY that the purpose of this policy was not to ‘save children from smugglers’ but to frighten parents from trying to seek asylum in the U.S by threatening to abuse their children. Does Trump wish to subvert the Postal service in order to subvert mail in voting? Conservative media was making a strenuous case that he does not yet lo and behold, the POTUS cut the legs from under them by saying that that is his exact intention. Moreover, the reason he wishes to do this is that higher voter participation would hurt the Republican party which, again, he said on T.V. Did Trump send federal troops to Seattle specifically to actively and aggressively crush protestors? Well it sure seems that way as in a leaked phone call with governors he himself said it.  Did Trump cancel a trip to Denmark because he was miffed at his failed attempt to purchase Greenland? Fake news I would say, a phony malicious leak from a disgruntled staffer I would say except AGAIN he himself said that was his motive. Does Trump regard public servants as owing personal loyalty to him and not to the constitution and the law (a core component of Fascist ideology)? Some pundits might say no but guess who disagrees with them? The President does! He complained publicly about Comey and Sessions being ‘disloyal’.

I have heard all of the above with my ears or seen it with my eyes but we have all read 1984 and know that if your senses contradict the party line it is your senses that are wrong. Perhaps the genius of the President’s mendacity is that no one believes him when he brazenly admits his crimes in public. Perhaps Americans hear exactly what he is saying and approve. Perhaps they even appreciate his candor. At any rate journalists spin elaborate theories about the hidden story when the President and his regime, with perfect transparency, lay out the whole thing in plain sight like the purloined letter in Poe. Of course, when all the conspiracies are in plain sight, as they are here, this seems to trigger some reaction that compels humans to seek a ‘hidden truth’ behind the curtain, perhaps involving malign actors in the deep state or George Soros. Certainly, no regime has told the truth about itself as openly as this one has and when Trump says again and again that he will contest the result of the 2020 election I point to his sterling record of honesty as evidence that we should believe him.          

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Suspicious: The Hermeneutic of Paranoia

  Religions, mythologies, ontologies, aesthetic movements, revolutions social or scientific, philosophical arguments and political institutions are all central for the program I teach in at Grenfell Campus (Interdisciplinary Humanities). These are what we study and we study them on the assumption (which I have rarely known to be defeated) that they repay close and serious examination. This means we proceed on the opposite basis to what many people seem to think is an educated attitude to the world. I refer here to what I have previously written about the hermeneutic of paranoia. This is the popular attitude that the purpose of education is not appreciation of the complexity of human culture but rather the rote ‘debunking’ of ‘claims’. For this view culture is all ‘bullshit’. Education, as we practice it, is ‘indoctrination’ or ‘brainwashing’. In the popular mind this attitude is what is thought of as ‘bold’ or ‘iconoclastic’ and is the attitude of ‘free-thinkers’. This is because cultu
Read more

Liar!

            We currently live in the throes of what I call a hermeneutic of paranoia or what a friend of mine has referred to as ‘malignant skepticism’. As educators, of course, we want to teach people to be skeptical, but it seems that something has gone seriously awry in this project. The skepticism we have sought to engender has, seemingly, consumed all standards of discourse and allowed conspiratorial, dangerous nonsense to proliferate. Skepticism has, seemingly, fulfilled the worst fears of critics of relativism and dissolved the very reason and public order on which a culture of intelligent critique rests. Worse, any return to older forms of dogmatism, whether religious or scientific, seems clumsy and forced, hopelessly compromised or even cringingly naïve. We can all see the effects of saying God, reason, or science in a louder voice to be null and, indeed, apt to breed their own kind of extremism. The result of all this is a world where greats swathes of people have lost any se
Read more

Cranks III

  In my last piece I alluded to a kind of crankiness that perhaps deserves more comment. This is the crankiness exhibited by scientists who comment on matters outside the domain of the sciences whether these be philosophical, religious or historical. The interventions of scientists in these domains are, almost without exception, cranky and it is useful to investigate why. What makes a scientist comment on these subjects in spite of a manifest unfitness to do so? Why do we need physicists commenting on the historicity of Jesus or chemists lecturing on epistemology or archeology? Why do we need the thoughts of ethologists on ‘poetry’ or of nuclear engineers on the ontological argument? Of course, we do not need such things at all yet specialists in THESE areas are deeply, existentially convinced we do. The first thing we must note is that ALL of these people deeply and correctly resent the intrusion of amateurs in THEIR domains. Yet at the same time they are incapable of exercising the s
Read more