The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age
    Danny Cardwell's picture

    An Open Letter To Angry Trump Supporters

    Dear Angry Trump Supporter: I get it. For the better part of forty years I've felt an anxiety similar to what you're experiencing now. Our anger isn't that different; it's connected to our shared inability to alter our day-to-day realities in any significant way. We share an uncomfortable truth: we're stuck reacting to the ebbs and flows of society because we're powerless to control them. You've seen sections of this country abandoned by the powers that be. Some of you have been suffering economic hardships in silence for decades. Pressing 1 for English is just a symptom of the cultural shift you've been forced to endure. Every other group in society champions their heroes: Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Caesar Chavez, Grace Boggs, Betty Friedan, Harvey Milk, and Louis Farrakhan, yet it's not "politically correct" for you to show pride in your race or heritage. America has changed, and it's not benefiting you. You're called a racist for articulating your fears, you get blamed for historical atrocities you didn't commit, and you're accused of having "white privilege" even though you don't know how it works, or seem to be benefiting from it. Up is down, left is right, and things are changing faster than you can adjust to them. I hate that you're in pain. I disagree with the way your anger is being manipulated for political gain, and I wish I could convince you that we (Blacks, Mexicans, Muslims, LGBQT) aren't your enemy, but it's probably too late for that. 

     

    I've read dozens of articles chronicling the Trump "phenomenon". Some were garden variety in-group out-group armchair psychology that settled for calling you racists and idiots (some of you are), but those articles didn't interest me as much as the articles that sought to connect your populism to the deeper societal issues and economic realities you've been facing. The underlying cause[s] of Donald Trump's political ascension will be studied and debated for a long time across multiple disciplines. If your guy wins the Republican nomination his campaign will have changed the way future Republican candidates run their campaigns. In essences, your movement will have strong armed the Republican nomination process. This is good and bad. Giving your guy the nomination won't help you in the general election if you continue alienating the rest of us. 2016 could be the year we find out if you need any of us to win in a general election. Your party has only won the popular vote one time (2004) since 1988. My hunch is that a strategy of offending every minority group in the country could backfire, but I've been wrong before. 

     

    The America Country music stars sing about is over. This country will never exist as it did in those television shows from the 50's and 60's. We aren't going away. Alexis de Tocqueville  understood all of this. He noticed how militant his fellow Frenchmen became as their standards of living improved during the French Revolution. One of the worst things you can do to a person who denies the effects of historical injustices is open the space for historically oppressed people to get access to freedom and economic opportunity. People don't freely go back to a status quo that puts the needs of their particular communities on the back burner for the sake of the majorities feelings. You're not responsible for the world you inherited: neither are we. The coalitions you see forming harbor some of the same mistrust between them as you might harbor towards all of us, but none of us are willing to go back to this place you seem willing to take us. When I hear "take America back" or "make America great again" I hear desperation. Those words are empty signifiers. If taking America back means it will once again be socially acceptable for a bigot to spit on my mother then: I'll fight you, not a metaphorical fight with words and ideas, but a real life out in the streets fight. If taking America back means my gay friends have to go back to their closets: then I know they'll fight you, and I'll help them. If making America great again means my brother's wife and his in-laws could be rounded up because being 4th and 5th generation Mexican-Americans isn't good enough for you: then I'll fight you. If I see a group of people harming my Muslim brothers and sisters: I think you get the point.

     

    Here's a secret: all of us are feeling the pinch of global capitalism. You woke up in a nightmare that transcends race and class. Instead of blaming us for the greed that sent the manufacturing base of our economy to the developing world, and created the unsustainable boom or bust cycles we see in the market, why not ask us how we've endured the trauma you're feeling. I love you and hope you let your anger go. Don't let hate radio, Fox News, and right-wing demagogues strip you of your humanity. The sooner you understand the underlying cause[s] of your anger the sooner you can move on. The market economy is a lot like the in-group out-group distinctions some of the Americans you see as enemies face daily: they exist in invisible spheres that are hard to explain to people who aren't on the underside of them, yet you feel their effects. You could learn a lot from us; we understand what's happening to you better than you do. 

    Have a Blessed Day!

    Danny Cardwell

    "I imagine one of the reasons people cling to their hates so stubbornly is because they sense, once hate is gone... they will be forced to deal with pain." James A. Baldwin

     

     

     

    Topics: 

    Comments

    To their ears, Danny, to their ears.


    This is one of your best posts, and they have all been outstanding.

    I have little hope that the anger will subside anytime soon. Red meat supporting bigotry have been mainstays of the message sent out by the Right. We live in two different societies. You note Country music. We not only listen to different music, we listen to different news shows on the radio, read different newspapers, watch different news, television and movies. We have different moral codes.

    When hungry children came to the border, the Right called for them to be sent back. When workers asked for a living wage, the Right said they were trying to steal money from corporations. When NOLA flooded and people died, the Right blamed the poor. It took continued national attention for the Governor of Michigan to even begin to consider addressing the poisoning of Flint, Michigan. There is no outrage over the poisoning on the Right.

    We have different religious beliefs, even though many of us share the same name for our spirituality. We have pastors who cater to the poor, and when offering a political endorsement select Sanders or Clinton. On the Right we have prosperity preachers who support Trump. We have Presidential candidates on the Right who appear at the gathering held by a man who uses the Bible to suggest that Gay people can be killed.

    Given our different beliefs and moral codes, I doubt that there will be many who take your words to heart.

     


    When hungry children came to the border, the Right called for them to be sent back.

    That's bad. Some would say it is inhumane, but characteristic of the evil which pervades the Right. Some could not vote for such heartlessness. So, what did your favorite candidate do? Oh yeah, she called for them to be sent back too. But is that the only thing that your favorite candidate did that has affected the treatment of those children? Why are they leaving Honduras to begin with? Well, here is a big part of the reason.  Don't let it cause any uncomfortable cognitive dissonance though, just keep blaming every ongoing  fault of both sides on the one side, makes tough decisions simple to deal with. 


    I disagreed with her original position. She has shifted her stance and now thinks each child should have an advocate.

    http://time.com/4218850/democratic-debate-bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton...

    I have no problems with shifting positions as Bernie Sanders has shifted his position on immigration when it came to a vote as noted Here

    http://time.com/4170591/bernie-sanders-immigration-conservatives/

    And Here

    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/bernie-sanders-and-immigration-its...


    I disagreed with her original position. She has shifted her stance and now thinks each child should have an advocate.

    I wish she would change her position and be an honest human rights advocate herself. Can you find a [convincing] link that shows where Hillary has 'shifted position' regarding a geopolitical philosophy which guided her to aid and abet the overthrow through coup of a democratically elected leader who had the popular support of his people and which allowed a hard corps right wing brutally suppressive government to take over? Do you doubt that, if she had tried, that she could have persuaded the coup government to reinstate the deposed President and let him serve out his elected term? Do you think there was anything "good" accomplished by her handling of the situation in Honduras? Do you recommend that voters "shift" their allegiance if revealed facts indicate that they should?


    I have seen different reporting of Clinton and Honduras. Clinton could not have taken action without Obama going along, agreed?

    Link # 1

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/02/1408141/-Setting-the-Record-Str...

    Link # 2

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/10/25/1438997/-It-Takes-Fortitude-and...

    Was thr contact request with the up  leadership t set up a meeting?


    Clinton could not have taken action without Obama going along, agreed?

    Are you actually trying to shift all the blame to Obama, who certainly sits where the buck should stop, and are you suggesting that Hillary took actions that cannot be used to judge her political philosophy because she was not yet at the very top of the chain of command and so she shouldn't be judged on those actions because .. well ... because she is Hillary, I guess?

      Oh yeah, as long as you are bothering to respond to my comment I can't help but wonder: Can you find a [convincing] link that shows where Hillary has 'shifted position' regarding a geopolitical philosophy which guided her to aid and abet the overthrow through coup of a democratically elected leader who had the popular support of his people and which allowed a hard corps right wing brutally suppressive government to take over? Do you doubt that, if she had tried, that she could have persuaded the coup government to reinstate the deposed President and let him serve out his elected term? Do you think there was anything "good" accomplished by her handling of the situation in Honduras? Do you recommend that voters "shift" their allegiance if revealed facts indicate that they should?


    I provided links that indicate Hillary Clinton did nothing wrong.


    So she should have sent in troops to put Zelaya back in office or what?


    Hillary kept the military from rescuing people in Benghazi and she led a coup in Honduras. Hillary was more powerful than the President. She has been busy.


    Sending in the troops would not exactly be breaking new ground, it's been done many times to assure the leader of a country is the one we want. In this case it obviously wasn't Zelaya. That said, and with the obvious caveat that any counterfactual is speculation, I firmly believe that a push by our State Dept. could have/ would have resulted in Zelaya being reinstated for the remainder of his elected term. I also believe that you believe that same thing, so unless you convince me that I am wrong, that you don't think Clinton had the power and influence to do so, I will consider your question to be simple bs misdirection intended to take the light of information off of one more wrong decision by Hillary Clinton.


    Here in Europe, Germany's welcoming stance was greeted with a flood of newcomers from all over Africa and Mideast, qualifying or not. You have to be careful what message you send to poor desparate people. Im sure thousands are preparing for how to best exploit leniency towards kids. Reminds me of microloans for women that the husbands then abscond with to go get drunk and gamble. Check out Bunuel's Viridiana sometime.


    Bravo!  We'll discuss at 10am Monday at halginsberg.com.


    Break a leg, guys!


    Thanks Michael. As always, Deacon Cardwell was outstanding.


    Then I'm sure you two were well cast together.


    ;-)


    Mr. Cardwell, well said. I am sending this to my daughter and son-in-law whom I hope will give it the thought and attention I think it deserves. 


    Thanks a million. I appreciate you taking the time to engage this piece. Have a great day!