Skip to main content

 

The Trump Legend

 

     What is the Trump story?  It will be quite different for followers and detractors.  I believe the reason that so many people can have completely opposite views of the same person and events lies in great part to our American, and perhaps human, myths.

      I had occasion once to be watching a televangelist in the company of some fundamentalist in-laws.  Seeing this person crying while singing a hymn, I thought he was the phoniest person I had ever seen.  But one of my wife's aunts turned to me and said, "Isn't he the most sincere person you've ever seen?"  I didn't answer, but it occurred to me that we were sitting in the same room watching the same event with completely opposite views.  I love studying history, but I am now more careful to try and research the historian.

      Some of us like to believe in heroic leaders following their "gut instincts" despite evidence to the contrary.  Television characters such as Jethro Gibbs of "NCIS" are rewarded for their courage to defy their superiors when their gut tells them it's the right thing to do.  So many fictional characters, especially in television and movies, are portrayed this way.

      Connected to this is the notion that many crisis are averted because of the heroic acts of one person.  We enjoy the savior myth, that were it not for this one special person being there in the nick of time, all would have been lost.  This sometimes translates into the political and governmental realm with figures such as Franklin D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill. Often ignored in this mindset are the leaders whose gut led them and their followers to defeat and sometimes slaughter, such as cult leaders and out-gunned generals: Adolph Hitler pursuing the invasion of Russia in the winter.

     But on the other hand, we also enjoy the reality of the achievements of  many unknown people working together toward a common goal.  We especially note this in times of natural disasters: hundreds or thousands of people pulling together to save victims of floods, tornadoes, wildfires.

     So, for the Trump supporters, the former is true:  he is a misunderstood hero who ignores norms to follow his gut and lead us to victories previously thought impossible, or at least, improbable.

     To his detractors he is an insecure narcissist who continues to act in denial of all evidence to the contrary, not because he has the courage of his convictions, but because he is incapable of admitting fault, thus being incapable of changing.

     For me, both viewpoints have some merits.  The inexorable accumilation of knowledge through scientific endeavors is historically evident.  At times an Isaac Newton or Albert Einstein pops up with a substantial breakthrough, but generally it is the slow, sometimes plodding, relentless work of thousands of unheralded people that moves us along, so that we know much more now than we knew fifty years ago, and fifty years from now we will know that much more.

     As for the Trump story,  we will know much more in the future.  For now, whichever side we're on, let's try to have patience with the other side who believe in one or another of our American myths perhaps a little more fervently than we do.

 

- PeteBarkett.blogspot.com

11/10/20

 

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

 Bannon Up! This analogy is far from perfect, but it represents to me a futile mindset.   A sacrifice bunt in baseball involves giving up an out to advance a runner into a better position to score a run.   Occasionally, a pitcher tries so hard to throw pitches that are difficult to bunt, that he ends up walking the batter, which moves the lead runner into scoring position, gets no out, and puts another runner on base.   I’ve heard former coaches and players announcing games cry, “He’s trying to make an out.   Let him!”   I believe Steve Bannon wants to go to prison, to make himself a martyr and hero to the right-wing nuts who support him.   I say, let him.   I’ve heard some pundits worry that convicting him would further infuriate the right-wing nuts.   I think it’s time to abandon that type of thinking.   We have seen time after time that making concessions to appease these people is completely unproductive.   They see conces...
Post a Comment
Read more

Musings

  Right-To-Lifers Don’t Go Far Enough       I was pro-choice, but I’ve changed my mind.   The problem is not that the State should govern what a woman does with her body, the problem is that the State has not gone far enough.   The argument is that to protect the life of a fetus, the State must overrule a woman’s privacy and bodily autonomy and regulate her body for her.   Fine.   If we want the State to be in the business of protecting life through bodily regulation, then go all in.   Stick to the prime directive.   Protect all life.   The State should govern both men and women to protect life.   The State should tell any healthy person what to do with their body in order to protect life.   So, if someone needs a kidney, liver, or any organ transplant to save their life, the State should find someone and take whatever parts are needed to save that life.   If not, then we are allowing organ-icide.   (...
Post a Comment
Read more
Inspired by "Is religion a force for good in the world?" - the debates with Christopher Hitchens Let's compare general religious tenets with general humanistic tenets: I assert that to be a good humanist you must follow the rules.   To be a good religious person you must break the rules. Religious:                                             Humanistic: love thy neighbor                                   love thy neighbor do good works                                       do good works live according to the scriptures              live according to what can be drawn from evidence (science) try to follow the dictates of god       ...
Post a Comment
Read more