I have been
under a misconception for some time now. That is, I have always argued that
Donald Trump was well known to all of us, way before the election. We knew he
was a pathological liar, a sexual predator, a racist, a misogynist, a con man,
a dishonest businessman, and, actually, an incompetent businessman. What we did not realize is that he is worse
than the sum total of those awful characteristics.
He told us, we thought jokingly, that he
could go out on Fifth Avenue with a gun, shoot someone and his support would
increase. Apparently, he really believes such a scenario, and might even
consider the act. Because, he now seems
to think that he is beyond our Constitution. He is above the law, and his "lawyers" have assured him that is so. Shades of Absolute Monarchies. I understand that Ivanka has begun thinking
of herself as Princess Ivanka. I guess,
in olden tymes, such creatures as "absolute monarchs" actually existed. But even they had their problems. In one
text, the author argues that even the concept of absolute monarchies was
problematic for a simple reason: “Nothing so clearly indicates the limits of royal power as
the fact that governments were perennially in financial trouble, unable to tap
the wealth of those most able to pay, and likely to stir up a costly revolt
whenever they attempted to develop an adequate income.”1
So, even if The
Donald has begun thinking of himself as a grand monarch, with unlimited powers,
his financial supporters will (may?) eventually weigh in whenever he grows “inconvenient”. In the meantime, however, we the unlucky will
need to deal with his powerfully negative and destructive tendencies. But again, we cannot claim we did not know
what he was like. Just that, however awful we thought he was, we did not
imagine he was actually this bad.
And I have been
thinking all along that at least some of the "powers-that-be" would rein him in,
even if just a bit. Turns out there are no actual "powers-that-be",or they are
uninterested in doing any reining. See, the problem here is that, if The Donald
imagines that he has some absolute power, then it implies that they also have
great power, and their limited brain power prevents them from conceiving that
their power might eventually clash with his power. As long as they can roam our country without restraint, why not give him this perception of absolutism? Works for them. So, the Mitch McConnell’s and Paul Ryan’s of
our world seem perfectly ok with this cretin in the White House. It seems not to matter what he says or does.
They have no comment.
And his broadcast
network of choice, The Faux News Network, amplifies his message of absolute
control, and has been even propagating the stories about “The Deep State”,
i.e., the FBI and the Special Council. Sean Hannity has been arguing that they
need to be eliminated, as soon as possible, because they pose a threat to His
Majesty. With this crew, we have a fairly complete symbiotic relationship, one
that benefits The Donald. We have The Donald, his largely ignorant supporters,
and The Faux News Network. He says or does something, The Faux News Network
amplifies his statements or supports his acts, and his ignorant supporters
cheer him on. It all seems to work
wonders.
And now, he has been
given almost carte blanche to make judicial appointments, which might well
create a more lasting problem for humanity than anything else he has done. His
cabinet appointments, Like Pruitt, DeVos, et al, however flawed, are at least
limited in time. If we get rid of The Donald, they automatically go away. But
his judicial appointments might be getting jobs for life, so they will be
around to terrorize us humans for quite a long time. So, this absolute monarch concept, however
much of a teaser, still will manage to plague humanity for quite some time.
But the central
question is, what can be done about it?
Again, in normal times, we have three branches of government, intended
to hold one another in check. This
system, though still in place in theory, is at best a tattered remnant of its
former vigorous self. As noted, Trump has been busily corrupting the judicial
branch, and the legislative branch seems corrupt in its own way, and,
therefore, disinclined to hold him in check, so long as he does not step
directly on their toes. And he seems not
to be doing so, although it is unclear what he would have to do to annoy
McConnell, or Ryan, or any of their slavish followers. Ryan is essentially an anarchist at heart. He
wants no government entities to step personally on his toes. Should they step
on others’ toes, he seems to care not one whit. And McConnell just seems a simpleton at heart.
So long as folks keep giving him a high-paying job, he is happy.
So, the only remedy
appears to be voting them all out of office. Now whether that will work is
still anyone’s guess. We keep hearing
rumors that the Dems are poised to turn some formerly red state blue. But the Dems are, at best, a flawed remedy.
Nancy Pelosi is way past her sell-by-date and needs to move off stage. And
folks like Bernie also seem a bit long in the tooth. I still await the arrival of bright, honest, youngish
candidates eager to take back the reins of power from the current crop of
cretins. And I wait . . . and I wait . .
. the 2018 elections are not all that far off, and I still am waiting for the bright
crew to appear.
Maybe they are
simply waiting in the wings.
I do worry actually,
about the cretinous MAGA supporters, and how they will react, should their King
Donald I be hastened out the door, or even impeached. We might actually be
facing the Great Second Civil War. Let us hope not.
And on that Donald I thing, I stumbled across
an actual reference to a King Donald in Wikipedia. Turns out:
Domnall mac Causantín (Modern Gaelic: Dòmhnall mac
Chòiseim), anglicised as Donald II (died 900)
was King of the Picts or King of Scotland (Alba)
in the late 9th century. He was the son of Constantine I (Causantín mac
Cináeda). Donald is given the epithet Dásachtach,
"the Madman", by The Prophecy of Berchán.
So
Donald could now be viewed properly as successor to The Madman. Seems right
somehow . . .
Stay
tuned . . .
1.
Bouwsma,
William J., in Kimmel, Michael S. Absolutism and Its Discontents: State and Society in Seventeenth-Century
France and England. New Brunswick,
NJ: Transaction Books, 1988
No comments:
Post a Comment