MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
![]() |
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
Alt. title: The political lexicon of a billionaire populist
By Marc Fisher @ The Washington Post, March 6
The language of the Trump administration rubs many politicians of both parties the wrong way. It’s designed to break through partisan paralysis, pull the country into an America-first nationalism and persuade Trump supporters that the new president meant it when he announced at his inauguration that “the hour of action” has commenced.
Comments
One would think that at some point Trump's supporters want him to do more than whip up their rage. He's not going to build a wall. 11 million immigrants will not be deported. There will be no health care plan with lower deductibles that covers everyone and is cheaper. Almost everything he promised if an unachievable fantasy. Will he eventually have to produce something? Or is it enough for him to be the cheerleader in chief leading his supporters in angry chants?
by ocean-kat on Fri, 03/10/2017 - 5:42am
You make a good point but it is one that when I think on it I fear that the situation might be that all the diehard fans care about is someone signifying their anger and not results. To me sometimes it seems all about feeling dissed and ignored for so long that it's good enough that they are finally the favored and all those "others" feel put down like they once did.
Also inherent in buying into the drain the swamp message is that federal government becomes lean and mean (literally with the latter.) That if the feds accomplish anything it is with a blunt and inexpensive instrument, otherwise it is better that they don't accomplish anything at all.Because to do something complicated (like have a state department or environmental protection) is to tax people to help the "others." I suspect the appeal of something like "the wall" is that it appears as a cheap simple solution when everyone else is saying "but it's complicated". And that if it pans out that a wall is complicated, they won't want it anyway. The Trump fan is anti-bureaucracy uber alles? I.E., cut through the shit, do it quick and easy or not at all, the "you're fired" thing of The Apprentice.
by artappraiser on Fri, 03/10/2017 - 8:50am
Is it just me, or does anyone else think that the wall may really be to hold us captive? Once the wall is up, trump declares war on Canada so that anyone trying to escape northwards will be shot. LOL
by CVille Dem on Fri, 03/10/2017 - 11:43am
Tom Cotton of Arkansas and Rand Paul of Kentucky realize that they might get pushback if they support Trumpcare.
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/09/the-republican-health-care-bill-threatens...
Trump supporters might not like Trumpcare any more than they like Obamacare.
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/3/8/14845708/obamacare-repla...
Republican voters are likely to take revenge on Republicans in Congress rather than Trump.
by rmrd0000 on Fri, 03/10/2017 - 9:04am
Oh I think this is definitely true: Trump supporters might not like Trumpcare any more than they like Obamacare. Now that I know more about it, despite the sales pitches, I do think it is correctly labeled "Obamacare lite." All it does is fiddle with Obamacare in dangerous, un-thought out ways. I very much see the situation like this: Ryan and supporters decided the best thing for the House to do as to their goals is "let's put some lipstick on this pig and jam her through." I just don't understand the end game plan yet. It may be intended just to get a process of change started, it may even secretly expecting it to fail in the Senate and is just to get a process started, it may be to eventually blame Dems for not delivering, etc. And I'm not sure whether Trump is supporting right now out of naivete or because he gets the whole plan.
by artappraiser on Fri, 03/10/2017 - 9:15am
p.s. recent news supports my above interpretation, as with the pushback he's getting, Ryan is now saying things like: voting for this doesn't mean there won't be amendments and changes right away....he just really wants to ram something, anything through for some reason. Don't forget he's far from an idiot about this, is trying to force this sloppy bill for a reason gleaned through experience.
by artappraiser on Fri, 03/10/2017 - 9:32am
Actually, I do think Ryan is an idiot. He does not understand that insurance involves healthy people covering the costs of sick people.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/paul-ryan-insurance-twitter_us_58c21...
by rmrd0000 on Fri, 03/10/2017 - 9:58am
We disagree, I think it's crucial for all to understand that he gets all that. From his wikipedia entry:
by artappraiser on Fri, 03/10/2017 - 11:15am
p.s. there's more of what I would call "applicable info." in the "Personal Life" section of his wikipedia entry:
by artappraiser on Fri, 03/10/2017 - 11:24am
I think a lot of his economics rep is hype
https://newrepublic.com/article/107242/how-paul-ryan-convinced-washingto...
Edit to add:
Another media created expert. He is telegenic
by rmrd0000 on Fri, 03/10/2017 - 11:47am
he's not an expert but he definitely is a heartfelt true believer libertarian > pull yourself up by your own bootstraps like he did. If forced to give something to the entire population, he'd probably not be that bothered giving everyone an I-Phone and I-Pad instead of health insurance or even the social security survivors he got, so that they can empower themselves and make their own choices. I imagine if he had his druthers now that we are all stuck with this huge medical industrial complex that is intangled with the gummint so that any surgery might kill the patient: vouchers, vouchers, vouchers whenever possible.
by artappraiser on Fri, 03/10/2017 - 12:15pm
Coincidentally, the German word for 'action' meant a roundup and forced deportation of Jews for 'resettlement' ie, shipment to the labor/death camps. (link: 'hour of action'.)
The language Trump uses is that of a demagogue. See below.
The Trump use of language utilizes the use of superlatives and words connoting violence and the unrestrained wielding of power.
This aspect of authoritarian leadership language was examined and recorded in contemporaneous entries in Victor Klemperer's I Will Bear Witness, what he called 'lingua tertii empirii.' (language of the 3rd Reich).......Trump: gory, bloodbath, graveyard, rapists, The Wall, disaster, maniacally (Bannon at CPAC).. etc.)
Huxley, Brave New World Revisited:
by NCD on Fri, 03/10/2017 - 12:10pm
would only like to add that this is nothing new with Trump, predates his involvement in politics, he used the same on the tv show and doing business before that. And that it is almost guileless and natural on his part as he presumes people "get it." He's been using this language probably since college. That is the whole "don't take him literally" thing discussed by the media. His petulance about the media and those who aren't fans and is all wrapped up in his narcissism, he presumes people will "get it.". I read an essay the other day, don't remember who it was by, but it was spot-on about his continual snit fits about size of inaugural audience or ratings of Arnold Schwarzengger replacement: pre-politics he is used to a media that "get it", the use of the language, it is P.R. business that he thouught himself good at. NY media would fall in line when he called them because they wanted to by his spin and language. So what is going on is that his narcissist feelings are really hurt,he reacts like a baby that everyone doesn't love what he is doing, doesn't get the language and appreciate it, as: the genius of an ultimate alpha who just wants to help, like a good father.
Is it totalitarian? yes. If you have every gotten deeply into the weeds of the studies of mysteries of like Hitler's rise to power or the mystery of other tolitarianisms, this is precisely how it works: good, well meaning father. There are actually nuanced differences between these words: "dictatorship" and :"totalitarianism."
by artappraiser on Fri, 03/10/2017 - 12:34pm
“After we came out of the church, we stood talking for some time together of Bishop Berkeley’s ingenious sophistry to prove the non-existence of matter, and that every thing in the universe is merely ideal. I observed, that though we are satisfied his doctrine is not true, it is impossible to refute it. I never shall forget the alacrity with which Johnson answered, striking his foot with mighty force against a large stone, till he rebounded from it, ‘I refute it thus.'”(Boswell’s Life of Samuel Johnson, quoted from Wikipedia.)
by Flavius on Fri, 03/10/2017 - 11:46pm