“Donald Trump is post-ideological. His movement transcends ideology…the reason so many Trump supporters and so many [Bernie] Sanders supporters agreed on so many things.”
That quote is not the enthusiastic expression of some new philosophy, but of almost two millennia old Machiavellian political opportunism and dishonesty, stated in modern terms. It is propaganda of the type successfully used by Hitler and tyrants past-and-present in times of political turmoil: claiming to be the leader of a new form of consensus based on appealing, not to the finest ideals or to the best in the human heart, but on the most base instincts.
This post is a reaction to the WaPo’s article Trump’s pollster says he ran a ‘post-ideological’ campaign.
After reading it, one’s reaction is either of profound depression or out-right cynicism, or both. I beg your pardon for the contemptuous tone of this post, it’s only a momentary human reaction to appalling news. And, please, check those two badges at the top of the right-side bar.
After briefly discussing how it started and how Bernies were had, see the Quotes from the horses’ (that’s what they are) mouth below.
It all started here
By now it is an accepted fact that many Bernies voted for Trump; Jill Stein’s numbers confirm they didn’t go to her. Since early in the primaries, they and the intellectually spent American Left were expressing their liking of Trump. After Sanders’ defeat by over 2 million votes in the primaries, the Bernies and the Left morphed into the white ‘Bernie or Bust’-creature–of–the- swamp political movement. That it was a white movement explains in part their sharing with Trump’s racist followers an admiration for that openly racist man. White people don’t feel personally threatened by Trump’s racism, and Sanders tells us now that focusing on (non-white) race was a mistake. Only white collar workers’ race should have mattered. But I’m digressing.
Bernies were all over the map threatening to rather vote for Trump than for that ‘nasty woman‘, the devil-incarnate ‘Killary Clinton’. And so they did, they voted for their alpha-male hero-of-the-working class billionaire, just to show ’em feminists who’s the man here.
Shock-and-awe redux and How they were had
Fine, but now we know how the Bernies and the living-dead leftists were totally had by Trump, their second-place hero. And yet, I was describing it, on this very inartful blog, live throughout the primaries and while I was about to jump off my balcony in shock-and-awe by the stupidity of these people. They drove many of us to momentary insanity. It was ugly!
And here now is Trump’s own campaign staff confirming my observations. All of the elements on this list were mentioned or implied in the discussion about how they got ideologically disparate people to vote for Trump:
- manipulation of emotions
- lack of ideological convictions –his followers’.
- appeal to the stomach
- manipulation of voters anger
- flat-out use of psychology propaganda
- male chauvinism –
- false promises
- exploiting the subconscious need for paternal image
That article is astonishing in that no one, not its writer, not the people interviewed, certainly not the WaPo’s editorial board, no one at all pointed to the flagrant shamelessness of all involved in admitting to devising such a superbly dishonest and immoral campaign. On the contrary, these people spoke with the absolute conceit and pride success gives the victor.
Except that Trump didn’t win because people liked him or because the dishonest campaign worked; he lost the popular vote by a historical margin. The consensus was that the sane voters didn’t want him as president.
But don’t expect the media to highlight that inconvenient fact or that they used propaganda to move voters into action and alter the outcome of the elections. They have convinced most people that the elections happened the way they are describing it.
The WaPo and the lying media, after momentarily (one day) admitting to contributing to Trump’s ‘victory’ with their ‘imbalanced’ journalism, are back in form with their dishonest ‘reports’. In this article, as in all analyzing Trump’s surprise win, Jeff Bezos, WaPo’s CEO, publishes praises of Trump and his team for having “defeat” that woman. It was a ‘coup‘ to intentionally appeal to fear and hunger, to exploit voters sense of political powerlessness manifested in the lack of beliefs in any ideals for a better organized society.
From the horses’ (that’s what they are) mouth
Heck, they pride in promoting anarchism, in removing any hints of channeling the voters’ anger through organized efforts outside the two-party system Trump and these voters were denouncing. They pride in offering no solutions, in moving the angry voters into action like a wrecking ball:
“His best group of voters were those who said they were ‘angry…So he had a rich pool to tap into.”
They wanted to burn it to the ground and then figure out what to do with the ashes afterwards.“
Policy didn’t matter…nobody cared about solutions
Trump’s success was always more about strength than ideology. Trump kept winning by playing checkers. [Appeal to masculinity and low IQ]
No one mentioned in the article that the angry voters may have felt that no solutions were offered, but Hillary Clinton did offer solutions. Thus, the media doesn’t offer the reader the opportunity to challenge that false discourse of an election cycle void of solutions and decided by angry voters. Who benefits from that distorted picture?
Follow your instincts. If you are sensing that Trump is ushering a reign of fear and manipulation of the most emotionally and intellectually impaired elements in our society for his own benefit and that of the most right-wing elements in the oligarchy, you are into something. That ‘thinking’ comes from collective experience, from knowing some history.
No one believed Hitler could win. When he won, no one believed he could be so cruel.