The Discourse of Social Collapse and the Growing Impossibility of Basic Discussion
I’m going to use the simplest example from a week of ugly examples that make me sad and tired.
If you read the news, Donald Trump recently did something so shocking and unprecedented that observers are staggered by his descent into evil:
He went to Arlington National Cemetery and brought a photographer, so the only possible comparison is to Literally Adolf Hitler. It was so outrageous for Trump to perform the Nazi maneuver of being photographed at Arlington that the son of the late Senator John McCain was forced to make an announcement to the world, revealing that the horror of the event had forced him to change his party registration and support the Democratic presidential candidate:
Sample framing from that story:
Jimmy McCain, who has served for 17 years in the military and is an intelligence officer, said he was angered by Trump’s conduct at the cemetery last week, adding “it was a violation.”
“It just blows me away,” he told CNN. “These men and women that are laying in the ground there have no choice” about being in a political ad.
See how evil Donald Trump is? No McCain man would ever stand for some bastard shooting a political ad at Arlington National Cemetery. Also, you can click here to watch the political ad that John McCain shot at Arlington National Cemetery. Screenshot:
The lay-up is so easy you can make it from the couch. Days of this:
Preceded by many years of this:
Which, to return to the bottom of the cycle, is now followed by endless waves of this:
But:
Every event is cooked. Every event is decontextualized, untethered, pumped full of hot air, backlit and blown up, faked into an imposed meaning that doesn’t stand up to the slightest examination, hyperemotionalized. Over and over and over again, controversy is simply invented, and then decorated with stupid rage emojis. I don’t know how many times I can say this.
This piece is co-written by a pair of lawyers from respectable professional backgrounds:
Sample claim: “When Trump campaign photographers and videographers accompanied the former president to the gravesites, a female Army official attempted to enforce the law. As she attempted to stop them, she was pushed aside by a Trump campaign aide.”
The link in that quote isn’t mine — it’s straight out of the quoted piece, and takes you to another story that depicts the pushing claim as a disputed allegation: “In a statement to NPR, Steven Cheung, the Trump campaign's spokesman, strongly rejected the notion of a physical altercation…”
So in the telling, there are disputed claims about an official being pushed; in the increasingly overwrought retellings, a woman was shoved aside, full stop. Now, big finish — here’s what that vicious Trumpian woman-shoving tells us:
Second, is there anything familiar sounding about Trump’s backers resorting to force when following the law doesn’t get them what they want? January 6 was an event of a completely different order, but Trump’s MO doesn’t change, whatever the setting or scale: Law and order be damned, do what it takes to dominate.
Then there was the third element described above: the disempowering through intimidation of those who might hold an authoritarian to account. The Army has reported that the federal official who sought in vain to prevent a violation of Arlington’s rules has declined to press charges.
Who can be surprised by someone who apparently fears retaliation from a mob boss’ violent soldiers? Their previous targets have included judges and prosecutors, journalists who dare to criticize the former president, and election officials doing their jobs. Trump understands the future intimidation value of weaponizing his base’s brownshirts — it allows him to break glass with impunity.
See, it’s not ONLY just like Adolf Hitler — it’s also a lot like January 6, and it’s like having brownshirts, and it’s like the Mafia! It’s probably also just like murdering a kitten, but maybe they just forgot to add that one because they were in a hurry.
A disputed allegation about a push;
“weaponizing his base’s brownshirts”
No charges were filed; this is indisputable evidence of “the disempowering through intimidation of those who might hold an authoritarian to account.” Whenever there are no charges, you see, guilt is presumptively proved, as is a subsequent conspiracy to intimidate. You hear about the neighbor? The cops didn’t arrest him — clear proof that he did it!
The standard of evidence in Matters of Orange Legal Controversy is do you feel like saying it?
Seen here, actual footage of a busy American newsroom:
We have to find a way back to…some form of very mild connection to reality? Somehow? Because we seem to be living through a large-scale psychiatric event. And the patients seem to be rapidly decompensating.
Part of the idea is to wear you out. It’s to get you to say “fuck it” and throw your hands up because it’s just too annoying to deal with. But the answer is “No”, easiest word in the English language. Ignore the whining about non-events.
Part of the idea is to isolate and stigmatize.
Part of the idea is to distract, conceal and obfuscate. The fire hose quantity of high pressure BS washes away the poor performance and treason of the ruling class. At least that’s the idea. But no we will not shut up. We see through the smokescreeen now. You guys in the blob are pathetic losers.
My lefty friends of course brought this up. They say Trump was gallivanting around with his thumbs up in Section 60 (apparently a hallowed ground where it's illegal to take campaign photos). I had to tell them that the photo was specifically requested by a gold star family and it was not a campaign photo. I also explained this entire debacle is simply a distraction from the real story which is that Kamala was invited to Arlington and did not show up because she's terrified of answering questions. Particularly terrified of questions related to how she was the "last one in the room" for very decision that put their children in the ground.