Chaos or Decadence?

In reading this post keep two things in mind. First, I’ve already acknowledged that I don’t understand what’s happening this election cycle. My intuition is that something very, very different from what has gone on all through my adult life is occurring but I have no idea what the outcome will be. The second is that I don’t like either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump and can’t envision myself voting for either one of them.

I’ll open with a little snippet of Matthew Hennessey’s recent post at City Journal:

The dominant and disorienting attribute of America in 2016 is that nothing is what it seems or, more accurately, what it actually is. On the campuses, intolerance is tolerance and censorship is free speech. In our public bathrooms, boys are girls and men are women. In our cities, the forces of protection are the forces of aggression. Stagnation is recovery; poverty is prosperity; war is peace.

Media cynicism has lately devolved into “don’t believe your lyin’ eyes” absurdity. In Orlando, according to the New York Times, an Islamist terrorist attack is somehow the product of Christian intolerance. In a bold display of cynicism about what its readers are willing to believe, the Times published an editorial pinning blame for the murder of 49 people in a nightclub not on the man who pulled the trigger—and pledged allegiance to the Islamic State and its leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi—but on GOP lawmakers “who have actively championed discriminatory laws and policies.” Omar Mateen’s victims, the Times said, were not the latest casualties of Islamism’s long war on the West but rather “casualties of a society where hate has deep roots.”

I think he’s reacting to the same things I’m seeing.

If you look at what the pundits, pollsters, and media outlets are saying, it’s dizzying, as if looking through a funhouse mirror. The only thing that’s clear to me is that they’ve learned nothing.

Their hatred of Donald Trump is obvious as is their defensiveness about Hillary Clinton. Look at the stories they’re running with as if in a pack. The Trump campaign is broke. How weak his campaign organization is. How damaging his policy positions are.

If fundraising from major donors, a strong, seasoned campaign organization, and solid, coherent policies were dispositive, Jeb Bush would be the undisputed Republican candidate. He isn’t. He fell on his face. I think that what that all of that tells us is that the yardsticks we’ve used in the past just aren’t worth much in this election cycle.

Something else to keep in mind: three-quarters of primary voters voted for neither Hillary Clinton nor Donald Trump. Based on the tone of what I’m hearing, concluding that Democratic primary voters will come home to Hillary or Republican primary voters will rally ’round Trump are just lunacy.

12 comments… add one
  • Guarneri Link

    Better dial up James. Look at his decidedly traditional Sabato post.

  • Dr. Sabato could be right. It could be a complete wipe out in favor of Hillary Clinton.

    There may be no chaos but instead decadence. The furious action may be an illusion masking the inevitable.

  • ... Link

    The dominant and disorienting attribute of America in 2016 is that nothing is what it seems or, more accurately, what it actually is. On the campuses, intolerance is tolerance and censorship is free speech. In our public bathrooms, boys are girls and men are women. In our cities, the forces of protection are the forces of aggression. Stagnation is recovery; poverty is prosperity; war is peace.

    At some point in all this Orwellian double-speak one simply has to come to the conclusion that the people spouting this stuff know that it’s non-sense, and are doing it for some benefit for themselves.

    I seem to recall some Soviet defector (if memory serves) saying something to the effect that all the Soviet propaganda from organizations like Pravda and Izvestia wasn’t to convince people that the printed stories were true. It was to rub the faces of the people in it as a form of humiliation, to completely demoralize them as to their own helplessness. “See? We can serve up this shit, and you have no choice but to eat it!” Throw in some occasional actual news (reports from sporting events, chess columns, weather, etc.) so that people still want to pick up the paper, and you’ve got gold standard demoralization techniques.

    That’s where we are now, when Bruce Jenner is woman of the year, and Diversity is Out Strength is the motto to spout when an Afghan jihadi shoots a bunch of Hispanic gays because he wants Sharia law and they demand inclusion in religious parades. (Let’s see Teh Fabulous Gays try to force various mosques to participate in Gay Days, a la Disney. That’ll be a blast, so to speak.)

    The ruling class in this country deserves the guillotine.

  • At some point in all this Orwellian double-speak one simply has to come to the conclusion that the people spouting this stuff know that it’s non-sense, and are doing it for some benefit for themselves.

    The benefit is that they’re demonstrating how virtuous they are. Without actually practicing virtue, of course.

  • Roy Lofquist Link

    Yup, things are definitely out of whack. Whack of which they are way out.

    I, myself, have been puzzled. I do have a modicum of experience in these matters as this is the 16th presidential election that I have followed.

    I have found two sources which I find incisive. The first is an essay by Angelo Codevilla in which he contends that the real divide in American politics is not Democrats vs. Republicans but rather the “ruling class” vs. the “country class”. In this essay he says of the ruling class:

    “Its first tenet is that “we” are the best and brightest while the rest of Americans are retrograde, racist, and dysfunctional unless properly constrained. How did this replace the Founding generation’s paradigm that “all men are created equal”?”

    http://spectator.org/39326_americas-ruling-class-and-perils-revolution/

    The second source is an interview with Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert and its ubiquitous iconic characters. In it he explains the Trump phenomenon.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uERs7AyaQmA

  • ... Link

    I think there’s more benefit to it than that. A docile population is worth it’s weight in platinum.

  • ... Link

    Roy, the election can also be considered as a war of the top and the bottom against the middle.

  • I can recall seventeen presidential election cycles (including the 2016 now under way) but I can’t say that I followed any before 1960.

  • Roy Lofquist Link

    Dave,

    My first political memory is watching the Democratic convention in 1952 and asking my dad why President Truman wasn’t the nominee. I have always been fascinated by politics. They were far more interesting to me than comic books. I can still recall the names of five or six members of Eisenhower’s cabinet.

  • Andy Link

    “The only thing that’s clear to me is that they’ve learned nothing.”

    The alternative explanation is they are so deep in their own bubble, they can’t comprehend what they’re seeing and fall back on what they know.

    It’s a crazy time and I don’t understand it. Even smart friends in my facebook feed are saying some pretty crazy shit. It’s not a good sign that so many seem willing to destroy the institutions that buttress our Republic in order to achieve ancillary partisan gain.

  • TastyBits Link

    In the second paragraph quote from the article, the first sentence ends with the word “absurdity”, and from the context of the sentence, it seems that the writer is implying that media cynicism is absurd. The rest of the paragraph consists of examples supporting the people who hold the “don’t believe your lyin’ eyes” position which he has deemed absurd.

    When the logic used to create an argument is to prove the opposite, we have really gone Through the Looking Glass. I am not sure What Alice Found There, but I can tell you what the rest of us have. We have found this type of utter nonsense. Interestingly, his bewilderment only seems to be focused on Trump and his supporters.

    Oh wait, I forgot. They are racists, misogynists, homophobes, yada, yada, yada. Let me help anybody who wants to explain in further detail how they are hate spewing machines: blah, blah, blah. We are all racists. Happy. Next topic. No really. Who cares. I know we all have white sheets in the closet. Whatever. I have three nooses and a fire hose, just-in-case. Neeeeext. Whoop-dee-do. I can go on and on and on. You win.

    Racist is a meaningless term now. Racist or peanut butter & jelly – I am making a PB&J sandwich, or I am making a racist sandwich. I have no doubt there is something racist about me and my PB&J sandwich.

    What this election is about is control, and those who have it are scared shitless. The Republican elites would rather elect Hillary Clinton. She will maintain the status quo. They may not like her or her policies, but at some point, they will be able to resume control of something familiar. The progressives do not really fear the Left, and they are too full of hubris to fear Trump.

    I have stated before, and I will state again. Trump represents a break from one’s own side, but it is not a defection to the other. The hardcore Left that cannot stand Hillary Clinton will never vote for Trump, but they will begin to see the way to affect change. Trump will draw some Democrats, but they will not be the hard Left. Eventually, their Trump will emerge, but they need a Tea Party first. (I doubt it was Occupy Wall Street. Black Lives Matter may be it, but it needs to attract more followers.)

    Eventually things churn until the parties realign, or a new party will form from the collapse of an existing one. The Trump supporters cannot philosophically support the Republican elite’s goals, and the establishment Democrats have more in common with the Republican elites than the Left.

    That and racist blah, blah, blah.

    As to anti-Trump Republicans coming around, the Sen. Cruz supporters are finding the guy they wanted in 2008 and 2012. He may not be perfect, but he punches back, hard, really, really hard. He also does not apologize for being successful or becoming wealthy from his success. At some point a lot of successful Republicans are going to wake up to the fact that nobody has ever stood up for them like he has. He talks bad about Big Business and Wall Street.

    If you think that any other politician is going to stand up for you, you can have Hillary Clinton. Then, you will not be a racist. Here is how it works: you are either a progressive, or you are a racist. If it helps any, they call everything racist. If you lace up your shoes right-over-left, it is racist, and if you do it the other way, it is racist also. If you walk on the right side of the sidewalk it is racist, but so is the other side. The only way to win is to refuse to play their game.

    And, that is racist as well.

    … the yardsticks we’ve used in the past …

    More than likely, these were not measuring anything. It is becoming apparent that many of the things that were “settled” were never so, but those most invested in their being settled are fighting any changes the hardest.

    It looks like the British elites were using the wrong yardstick also.

  • steve Link

    Among other things I thin this comes from the constant bombardment of misinformation, and outright lies. Had lunch with a good friend today who is a reasonable guy. One of my many conservative friends. He told me that London is now more than 50% Muslim. London has a population of about 9 million. All of the UK has about 3 million Muslims. By UK census numbers the Muslim population is about 13% of London. This is one of the smartest, most reasonable people I know, but since ehe gets so much of his info from conservative news sites, he actually believes stuff like this.

    While some things now are actually worse, most things are not that much different. I think it is people’s ideas that things are much worse than they really are, coupled with fears it will get much worse, that are driving a lot of the weirdness.

    Steve

Leave a Comment