The deep rot exposed by Trump’s return to power

Thought experiment #1

Imagine a baseball stadium. Fill it with twenty thousand Americans. Require Democrats to wear blue and Republicans to wear red. At the podium at second base, ask a person to give a speech about, say, immigration.

Soon fights begin.

Rewind.

The same twenty thousand people. Let them dress as they like. Instead of a speech guy, put two baseball teams there. Instantly it’s a different energy. Team One’s fans will include both liberals and conservatives, suddenly united by a common cause. Same thing, second team. There will be disagreements, of course, but since we’ve been taught acceptable discourse in baseball, they tend to be relatively good-natured.

Questions for discussion:

Regarding the first example:

Who gave the order to wear red or blue?

Who brought this podium here?

Who chose the topic? And from which list?

Is it possible that “politics” has come to mean persistent debate over a short list of pre-approved topics (immigration, abortion, cancel culture, etc.), with these topics somehow provided by (let’s say) some distant forces? , which also provided a rigid framework for their discussion, a structure designed not to decide anything but to ensure constant disagreement, with agitation as the goal, and agitation being, let’s face it, a big moneymaker?

Thought experiment #2

Seat four Democrats and four Republicans around a charming local conference table somewhere in the heart of the country. (Put one of those golden American maples out the window and every now and then an autumn leaf will fall from it.) They are the city council. Their theme is potholes. In the city, potholes cost five thousand dollars, but the council only has three thousand in the budget to repair them.

These eight people are trying to solve a specific problem. What holes can be left unfilled? Well, which ones are the biggest? Shouldn’t we take care of that in front of the hospital? These three, on a road on the outskirts of town where no one ever goes, will have to wait.

The discussion is not theoretical, but practical. (What is the opinion of the left on potholes or MAGA look?) This problem solvingwhat we Americans are good at (or at least we think we are). Most people, regardless of party, know a pragmatic solution when they see one, especially if they have worked on the problem and have some understanding of the costs, choices and sacrifices required to solve it.

There may be something of a tenderness that may arise among this group of people.

We, the Pothole Eight, will go through wars together. We’ll laugh about it together. ridiculous criticism of our work from an ill-informed population. Perhaps we will feel some pride in what we have achieved. Sometimes I’ll notice a new big pothole while driving and call Murray, my friend on the council, who may be a Republican, but frankly, I don’t care. I just want to tell him about this big pothole.

Questions for discussion:

What or who makes us dislike each other so much?

Could it be that one of the reasons we feel bad right now is that our natural desire to love each other is being thwarted by distant, profit-oriented forces?

Thought experiment #3

Imagine you are about to have a political argument with a close friend or family member. You are on opposite sides of the divide between left and right. You’ve discussed this many times already.

Many times.

Questions for discussion:

Don’t you sometimes think it would be easier if you each just brought a small TV and left it on in the kitchen, tuned to the appropriate network, and the two of you went outside and talked about whatever you’re thinking about? have original knowledge? When you get there and talk like that, wouldn’t it be nice to feel your pre-formed “political” shells fall off? And wouldn’t it be discouraging and alarming when, as soon as one of you slips up and utters a challenging word or phrase (“immigrant”, or “Trump”, or “politically correct”, or “eats cats and dogs”, for example) , you fall back into your hoary “political” jargon, like actors who suddenly realize that the scripts you’ve been given must be followed at all costs?

At that moment, when you two stand there like Rock ‘Em Sock ‘Em robots, beating each other up with someone else’s phrases, often looking a little sad, even ashamed, who is speaking through you?

Thought experiment #4

Imagine our simple pastoral predecessor walking around with a club in his hand and smelling flowers.

This caveman’s ability to form opinions based on mental projections allows him to survive. This is true for us too.

But we receive much more information than he does, information of a special kind, information that is powerful and was created by people with specific agendas. It is communicated subtly, in a way that gives us a deep sense of belonging. It’s addictive. It’s stunning. It flows directly into the brain, essentially the same brain that Mr. Flower Sniffer walked around with, and like a stomach meant for nuts and fruits suddenly confronted with a TripleFlame pasta and lard burger, that brain begins to have digestive problems. , but gives a good try anyway.

Questions for discussion: