corruption & curiosity
A few months ago, I attempted a dialogue with someone in my life who I used to have good old political and societal discussions with. In the last few years, there’s been less conversation, so I wondered if we might reignite our discourse to consider some recent events in the news, media, political sphere through an objective lens. I respected this person for their ability to zoom out with me, even though we identify on opposite ends of the socio-political spectrum.
Unfortunately, the conversation didn’t feel like much of a conversation. It ended up being a back and forth exchange of suggestions of thought, “how about this? what do you think of this?” met with thought-limiting biased rebuttals.
I started the conversation questioning how this person feels about the FCC involvement with what’s going on the public airwaves. Did corporate and regulatory pressures influence the response? He brought up Tucker Carlson- how could you cry “free speech” with Kimmel’s suspension and celebrate Carlson’s firing? Hypocrisy, Nicole! IMO, the difference between those firings is how involved the federal government was. But what do I know?
Literally, I am always wondering what the hell I even know. I read posts and articles and reddit rants from the opposite side of the spectrum and it ties my brain into tighter knots. Some dude from Reddit: “This clown used to get paid 16 million dollars annually to alienate half of America by turning his show into his own political propaganda, favoring the left.” Wow, I could say the same, and do say the same, about Trump.
He goes: “I’m not brainwashed. You need to read, Nicole.” Um, that’s funny because I could literally say the exact same thing to you.
How is it that we both think the other is brainwashed, we both think the other needs to read X article or blog to see clearer, and we both think the other lacks common sense and basic critical thinking skills?
I changed the topic. I thought maybe we could find common ground here. We are both political skeptics. I stand by Bernie Sanders ideologies and critiques of the federal government and politics, regardless of partisanship. We have, in the past, been able to critique both sides of the government. So…I wasn’t expecting this.
I responded, “it did come to light!” and provided the basic examples you might think of, citing his conviction and off the charts conflicts of interest. They were all met with “no, the attorney general was corrupt, not Trump.” He provided some more dead-end rebuttals to the multiple examples of Trump corruption I provided, and then the conversation was over. Of course the conversation ends, because when all you know are thought-limiting cognitive biases, your little world gets so small that conversations can’t go on that long.
It was water under the bridge. I didn’t bring it up again. I had my answer: we can no longer have objective political conversations. In my opinion, he has lost any curiosity to understand broader concepts that he ever had, is on a propaganda-fueled, pre-determined path restricting problem solving, and simply, he may just be too far gone.
I couldn’t stop thinking about the exchange and trying to understand how he could believe the things that he said. In turn, I’m trying to process the divide and desperately curious to understand, to get into their shoes. We accuse each other of the exact same things! What is happening? Are we living in alternate realities?
By David From, pulled from The Trump Presidency’s World-Historical Heist:
One of Trump’s tricks, throughout his career in office or competing for it, has been to depict the U.S. political system as corrupt from top to bottom. Here’s how the method works.
In August 2015, Fox News hosted the first of the 2016 Republican-primary debates. Trump then led the polls, but he was still generally dismissed as a novelty candidate, certain to fade as summer turned to autumn and the contest became more serious. After all, Trump had briefly led the polls of prospective candidates in 2011 too, but never entered the race. Trump was asked a question that must have looked deadly when it was drafted by the Fox hosts:
Mr. Trump, it’s not just your past support for single-payer health care. You’ve also supported a host of other liberal policies; you’ve also donated to several Democratic candidates, Hillary Clinton included, Nancy Pelosi. You explained away those donations, saying you did that to get business-related favors. And you said recently, quote, “When you give, they do whatever the hell you want them to do.”
The trap set for Trump in this seemingly damning choice is either to justify his support for liberal causes or to condemn himself as a crook who paid bribes for corrupt favors. Trump answered:
I will tell you that our system is broken. I gave to many people. Before this, before two months ago, I was a businessman. I give to everybody. When they call, I give. And you know what? When I need something from them, two years later, three years later, I call them. They are there for me. And that’s a broken system.
The moderator tried to close the trap: “So what did you get from Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi?”
Trump nimbly pivoted and thrust the likely Democratic Party nominee into the trap instead: “I’ll tell you what. With Hillary Clinton, I said, ‘Be at my wedding,’ and she came to my wedding. You know why? She had no choice! Because I gave.”
Suddenly, a potentially damning image—of Trump grinning for the cameras alongside Bill and Hillary Clinton—was converted from a vulnerability into a weapon. Trump did not care if listeners thought ill of him, so long as they thought equally badly of everyone else. If all were crooked, then the most shameless crook might present himself instead as a brave truth-teller.
“Everybody does it” became Trump’s all-purpose excuse. The excuse worked, to the extent it did, because of widespread disinformation about the “everybody,” the “does,” and the “it.” If Trump and his supporters can defame others, they can dull voters’ awareness of the astounding and horrible uniqueness of Trump’s corruption.
They (Trump admin) can dull voters awareness of the astounding and horrible uniqueness of Trump’s corruption.
And then I understood what was at play here with my friend. This is how he could somehow be oblivious to the landslide of corruption allegations that most definitely have come to light. And he continues to go after the Clintons (THE EMAILS), the “Biden Crime Family,” James Comey, Leticia James. They’re guilty!
Okay, but, so are you? Master deflector, question dodger, and manipulator.
But I doubt I will be convincing anyone of that.