What a world we live in: a “pure” blonde white woman who was the next Steve Jobs had been convicted of only four counts of fraud (yeah, that was still “sexism” according to the MSM) while the evil dark-skinned Svengali male was just convicted on all 12 counts in the Theranos fraud case in a separate trial. Double standards? Well, maybe just a “little” in this case. Elizabeth Holmes is a “mother,” so don’t expect her to do much more than pay a fine (which she can’t pay anyways) and (one suspects) a suspended sentence. If this is the case, I’ll probably have to write a post to expand my view on this.
Anyways, there has been a lot of talk from the radical far-right on “impeaching” Joe Biden. The rationalizations for this are absurd, but a predictable response to the January 6 investigation. One thing you might notice is that “liberals” in this country tend to try to reason with people who disagree with them, or to avoid a prolonged argument, concede a point or two. But that is not the case with people on the right these days. These people are absolutely consumed with nuclear-powered rage. Once their emotional reactor melts down, there’s no stopping them. You question them to justify or explain their ridiculous views, you might as well be holding a "rational" conversation with “Taz” the Tasmanian Devil:
We remember that Donald Trump was first impeached for secret and unconstitutional abuse of power by attempting to secure a foreign government’s cooperation in corrupting the 2020 presidential election to benefit himself, and the second time for being the chief instigator in the January 6 insurrection and the overthrow of the democratic process. What does the far-right think are legitimate reasons to impeach Biden? Inflation, gas prices, crime, the border “crisis”—or whatever else their sociopathic minds can muster.
Not that any of these are "good," but these are not impeachable offenses, and practically every president that ever served could be “impeached” for such reasons. There is a logical and reasonable answer to every illogical or conspiratorial claim made by the far-right, such as U.S. oil producers taking their sweet time restocking supplies post pandemic consumer reduction to boost profits, which is the principle reason why gas prices are so high. If there is a political “benefit” in it for them, U.S. oil producers will do what is necessary to “help” themselves, not consumers.
Things have certainly changed since the Republicans began embracing far-right extremism as an election tool since the 1980s—or 1968, when Nixon began his “Southern Strategy.” This week in Vox, Zak Beauchamp writes that “That Donald Trump would incite violence in pursuit of power was not only predictable but predicted …Yet Republicans elevated him to the world’s most important job, and have made no secret of why.” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said at the time that he could accept Trump as president as long as it meant that Republicans could load the bases with far-right Supreme Court justices.
“Unfortunately” this was like destroying a mountain to get a few grains of gold. “With Trump’s election, the conservative establishment succeeded in cementing its control over the Court. But this victory required that they cede control over their movement to an unstable demagogue,” and now “American conservatism is thus simultaneously ascendant and in crisis,” writes Beauchamp. It achieved power despite a majority of population as whole oppose its “doctrines,” and to hold on to this power, so-called “traditional conservatism” found itself obliged to “ally itself with forces of far-right reaction who raged against the idea of equality at the heart of modern democracy.”
Newt Gingrich introduced a legislative strategy which eschewed compromise and demonized the opposition, and later the Republican Party embraced the clearly racist underpinnings of the Tea Party movement. And finally, just as German political elites believed they could both use the populist fervor stoked by the Nazis and control those who stoked that fervor—Hitler especially—controlling Trump and his extremist supporters was a pipe dream. Beauchamp noted that in courting the “fervor” of far-right reaction for decades, the traditionalists on the right were fooled into thinking that they could limit the “real-world” influence of the extremists. But they were wrong; once a fanatic who achieved a cult of personality not just by feeding off far-right extremism, but feeding into and becoming its very center, this became that most dangerous element to democracy: a fascist extremist who now had the power to put fascism into practice. Destruction of democracy was no longer just a “threat,” it was now closer to “reality.”
Beauchamp also notes that the “intellectual” underpinnings of far-right Republicanism is predicated not on the “liberal” democratic principle of egalitarianism, but of maintenance of social hierarchies, of which that between the rich and poor, and privileged and unprivileged, are less important than racial and cultural “hierarchies.” Racism and racial hierarchies have always been an important feature of the far-right, and the few “rights” that the far-right cherishes—like the Second Amendment and “freedom of speech”—has, if you scratch beneath the surface, revealed this racial paranoia.
What happens when the radical, Trumpist right has the levers of power on the state level? We see that in Florida today, where Gov. Ron DeSantis has signed a series of laws whose goal is to stifle dissent against his rule, pushing through a so-called “anti-riot” law targeting the freedom of assembly rights of those opposed to the fascist slide in Florida, and passing an “anti-woke” law in schools and universities which are just an excuse to deny minorities a voice while allowing racists and cultural bigots free reign to poison the atmosphere with their hate beliefs.
In the New Yorker, Susan Glasser points to an episode which makes it clear just how far gone the Republican Party is in the age of Trumpism. The “old guard” as represented by William Barr—as bad as that is—is helpless in the face of the radical “new guard,” as represented by former House “Freedom Caucus” member Mark Meadows, who no one should be under the illusion that he wasn’t one of Trump’s most vile aiders and abettors:
When Barr expressed alarm to Meadows that Trump was taking “bullshit” fraud claims too far, the chief of staff soothed him. “I think he is becoming more realistic and knows there is a limit on how far he can take things,” Meadows replied. The next day, however, Meadows told Ginni Thomas—the far-right activist and wife of the Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas—that the battle to keep Trump in power was a messianic struggle. “This is a fight of good versus evil,” Meadows texted her. “Evil always looks like the victor until the King of Kings triumphs. Do not grow weary in well doing. The fight continues. I have staked my career on it.”
Thus like with “Taz,“ there seems no “reasoning” with this new “reality.” To quote from the Bruce Springsteen song, the radical Republican movement of Trumpism is “Like a river that don't know where it's flowing (they) took a wrong turn and just kept going.”
No comments:
Post a Comment