If there's one thing, perhaps ONLY one thing Americans can agree about when it comes to Donald Trump it's this: he is a polarizing individual. Not so much in the typical "you either love the guy or you hate him", although this is not far from the truth. With Trump the polarization is 100% divisiveness. Not exactly a desirable character trait for anyone holding the office of the Presidency but he's done little if anything to alter the situation. In fact he seems to revel in stereotyping his constituency and breaking them into two basic groups. Up until a few years ago Trump threw his hat in with the liberals he despises today but now "he's on the other team", dug in and "fighting the good fight" for the conservatives. The second group, though I'll refer to them as liberals, are not progressives with a Utopian agenda so much as they are simply people who oppose Donald Trump (and/or his policies). Most of them ARE actual liberals but ideology is not the point with our president. As we've seen he will crucify high ranking members of his own party for the simple sin of disagreeing with him. So we need to be honest from the start. He's gleefully playing a game of Us and Them and he's the King of "Us". America being an entertainment-addicted society has been more than happy to play along. But now...Charlottesville. As a polarizing, divisive man Donald Trump could have channeled his gift into a plea for social and racial harmony, after all he did say he wanted to represent all races when he was campaigning (remember the condescension of "What have you got to lose?"). Of course he said a lot of things when he was trying to secure the vote, that's another gripe (of many). Right now, with wounds still fresh and too many still sitting on the fence, I think there are a couple of important points that should be made (not that I'll be able to succinctly elucidate them but I can't just sit back and not say anything about this...I'd like to think everyone feels that way).
On Friday night we all saw a group of assorted hate organizations band together under the "alt-right" umbrella, take to the streets of Charlottesville, Virginia sporting Nazi flags, raising up their left hand in the traditional Ku Klux Klan salute, carrying tiki torches (since burning crosses would have been too obvious, nevertheless quite reminiscent of KKK rallies held outdoors in the evening) and spouting mantras lifted straight from Mein Kempf (the sentiment if not the actual words, although "Blood and Soil" was a popular slogan often employed by Nazis so the reference is not lost to me).
Okay, that's Friday night. No violence but still...it's my opinion that any reasonable, intelligent president would have gotten in front of this thing as soon as possible. Trump should have said something that very night condemning that "collection of clowns" (to use White House chief strategist and World of Warcraft enthusiast Steve Bannon's words). I don't see any logical excuse for why he didn't but I'm guessing he thought it was a First Amendment issue, that these alt-right troll-powered dissenters were entitled to the exercise of free speech. After all, they had a permit, right? It's not against the law to belong to an extremist group even if said group, at their core, celebrate hatred and the death of Jews and African Americans (among others).
They had a permit and anyone with half a brain knew they were testing the President to see if he was really on their side, or if that's too much to expect, to see how far they could take it while still remaining within the boundaries of the law (we're still talking about Friday here...obviously they weren't able to restrain themselves...nothing in the world a skinhead loves more than a fight, they were probably overjoyed when counter-protesters, including members of ANTIFA showed up [the anagram stands for "anti-facism"...the main difference setting them apart from peaceful protesters is sort of like the difference between Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X].
But I digress. My point was that Trump, if he really cared about the American people and if he wasn't concerned with what his alt-right cronies might think, should have, in the words of Deputy Barney Fife, "nipped it in the bud". He did not. It wasn't a requirement so it's doubtful any message was sent by his inaction, other than the one the alt-right Hitler youth divined from his silence.
Before I continue...though I originally had wanted to write about these events outside of the political spectrum, insomuch as that can actually be done, I made the mistake of starting off with a comment about Trump. Sorry about that but I don't think it could have been helped. Like every other issue unfortunate enough to get tangled up in his weird spin machine this one has become "about Trump". Conservative skillet-head Allen B. West wrote that "liberals blame Trump for Charlottesville" but nothing could be further from the truth. "Liberals" (and anyone else who was paying attention) didn't start piling onto Trump until it became evident he was in no hurry to make a public statement. It was his tardiness, the limp and ineffectual content of his original statement made TWO DAYS LATER and the perception that such sloth and relative indifference could only embolden the hate groups that turned him into a pariah of this issue. Deservedly so, in my opinion.
A half-assed press release followed, as we all know, in which some White House intern was paid to speak for the president (joking, it probably wasn't an intern but the point is IT WASN'T THE PRESIDENT so strike two). And then soon enough Trump realizes he has to try and appease the people in his base who don't sport Swastika tattoos. And he spits out the typical mumbo-jumbo, not exactly sounding sincere but he never does so I don't hold that against him. "We condemn hatred of all kinds, including this that and the other", you know, all headline, no article. But then he did something so typical and yet I'm still scratching my head asking, "What in the world?" But I have a pretty good idea and it all comes back to what I originally said in reference to his divisiveness.
As far as I can tell Donald Trump made up a new label. He found a way to turn what should be a battle between the better angels of our nature against forces of hatred and death...into a battle between liberals and conservatives, Republicans and Democrats, Patriots and Traitors, the alt-right and...here it comes, don't miss it..."the alt-left". It's binary with him, either/or, if you don't think so you haven't really been watching.
So if the alt-right is a collection of white supremacists, neo-Nazis, racist agitators (and a few "really good people") then what does the newly christened alt-left stand for? Or maybe the better question is "what does the alt-left stand AGAINST?" I've read Trump supporters insist that ANTIFA were the yin to the alt-right's yang...folks, that's bullshit. ANTIFA is the yen to FACISMS yang, I don't support their tactics but they had every right to be there because if this fubar party wasn't the very definition of fascist consolidation then I don't know what is. Trump talks tough but he doesn't have the spine to stand up to bigotry and insidious hate even were it to come knocking on Halloween all decked out in silly costumes (well, it wasn't October 31st, the costumes did tend to stick out like a sore thumb). Trump assigns blame to neo-Nazis/white supremacists/etc. for a spectacle that cost three people their lives...with one caveat: blame must also be equally assigned to the people who were there fighting Nazis. You know, kinda like your grandfather or great grandfather did in World War 2.
Okay, will probably stray off topic again but there are a couple more things before I sign off.
Have you noticed that practically no one on facebook has the ability to argue a point in comments without turning the conversation into a flame war/insult fest? 1st dude: "First amendment freedom of speech violated by Spotify removing albums by white supremacist bands". 2nd dude: "First amendment doesn't apply to commercial entities, what the hell is wrong with you? Go dust off your copy of the Constitution and get back with me after you've comprehended it." 1st dude: "Up yours, 2nd dude, I went to Hollywood University of Constitution study, I know that like the back of my hand. I think you're the one who needs to go to the library." 2nd dude: "I live in a (expletive deleted) library, what do you mean? You obviously don't understand what makes businesses exempt, they can do what they want." 1st dude: "Hey, don't get me wrong. I'm a Bernie supporter so I know the constitution in seven different languages." 2nd dude: "You ain't no Bernie Sanders supporter! Quitcha lyin'! You probably voted for Hillary." 1st dude: "That goes to show what you know...I voted for Trump."......okay, you get my point. It's one of facebook's flaws in that even though it allows you to express yourself personally it also tends to facilitate division and provides a platform upon which silly wars are fought. It's ridiculous, you know it and I know it.
On one level I know that facebook is a place where you can cherry pick characteristics of your own personality and present them to the world (or at least to the middlin' number of friends who actually read your posts). I find it quite nice to know that everyone who has ever read my posts eventually is exposed to the ethereal music of Sigur Ros. Not quite so musical is the chainsaw snoring my wife knows so well. That awesome Mexican restaurant's food was so good I had to take a snapshot and post it to my timeline. I will not, however, be searching for my camera as I prepare the hearty bowl of Ramen noodles I'll be feasting on for lunch today. My dog's real cute, isn't he? You should see him when he's laying down turds in my neighbor's yard. Hopefully that point has been made...
But some people show their true colors on facebook. People I thought I knew have posted stuff that I (or any other person with a sense of decorum) believed crossed the line in many different areas. I try to look at those posts with a proper perspective and the majority get off with a warning (read: an imaginary conversation with that person in which I say "if you do that again I will have to warn you once more."). But I have lost a couple of friends who apparently thought I crossed their own red lines. And I have "un-friended" a couple of people, begrudgingly mind you, for what I perceived to be if not radical views then troubling trends. One of those people might be surprised to know that I still look at his profile practically daily, that many times I've wished to express an opinion and discuss a topic reasonably but refuse to enter back into the republican/Trumpian/evangelical echo chamber his timeline has become.
So take that as you will, I realize I've resorted to a sort of meandering stream-of-consciousness personal whatever you want to call it. This is why I'm no writer. If I could only master the outline, but no, I'm too lazy and distracted. What do the last few paragraphs have to do with Trump? I don't know, probably nothing. Perhaps I could make a case that Donald Trump is without a doubt THE social media president. He's allowed himself the luxury of limiting his primary communication with the country he supposedly "serves" to 140 character tweets. The kind of dissension he foments plays really well on facebook and there are more than enough disenfranchised voters in his base to make a helluva splash.
What I wish for the most in this country is for people to stop seeing each other as enemies simply because we don't agree about the issues, regardless of how important they are or how passionate we feel for them. Went to the grocery store yesterday and some older guy bagging items was on a roll, "blabbedy blabbedy blab, next thing you know you'll get sued for looking at someone the wrong way. This liberal society has gone crazy." Come on, man. There has never been a time in my life (or probably his either) when society HASN'T been "going crazy", why you wanna drag the liberals into it? I don't get out enough to know if that kind of shit talk is fashionable in these parts, I have to just hope there's some balance in this small town. You may hear me talk that particular stripe of talk about Donald Trump but you'll not hear me say anything hateful to or about his supporters (talking about real people now, not names and pictures on a computer/phone screen).
If anyone has read this far you deserve a medal...but seriously, if you made it down this far I appreciate you letting me whine on your bandwidth. As always I am eager to discuss anything, everything and nothing I've said here. I'm against Trump and have been since long before he became a candidate but I will not judge you or even deride the President when speaking to you about him. If that goes against your perception of what a liberal is then I apologize and would like to think that other liberals would do so as well. Then again, human nature being what it is you're going to find radicals and extremists on both sides. Besides I only call myself a liberal because in this binary world of political affiliations I can't bring myself to embrace the conservative mindset. I don't completely embrace the liberal mindset but am more aligned to the left than to the right.
