World is Falling Apart Thread (Locked forever)

[dsheinem]

Here's what I posted this morning to social media about all of this. I've been trying to push back on a lot of the despair I've seen around me, especially from my students and colleagues.

--

Things I am holding on to this morning to try and push down the nausea and push back the tears:

-The Supreme Court managed to be mostly ok most of the time even when Scalia was there, so one Trump replacement won't spell the end of everything. RBG is tough and can hold on, I am sure. Breyer can hold on, too, he's still in his 70s. Kennedy probably won't be keen on ceding his seat to Trump, and hopefully that is enough to keep him there. I feel like I can still reasonably hope that there won't be the kind of SCOTUS shakeup that people fear.

-Aside from the legally and fiscally dubious nature of many of Trump's more inane campaign proposals, there is also a lot of internal division in both parties that will still likely make things hard for Trump to pass much of what he may want to. Our system is bigger than the presidency, and the legislative and judicial obstructionism that defined much of Obama's presidency will likely also define much of Trump's.

-Trump's potential long-term damage can be reasonably mitigated in two years with a well-organized midterm election. The people have spoken - they don't want establishment politicians. The left has plenty of smart people that can meet that demand. If Trump actually defers to states on many policy issues (the way a good conservative would), his bad ideas will have less impact than they might otherwise. (Hillary's bad ideas, by contrast, would be something we'd likely all have had to deal with).

-There's going to be a lot of great punk music, hip-hop music, political documentaries, and other protest-focused art and media in the next four years. We may live in a world where Ted Nugent could play an inauguration, but we also live in a world where especially people under 40 are (statistically) listening closely and often to artists like Beyonce, Kendrick Lamar, Bon Iver, Adele, Lady Gaga, etc. whose politics are way more in line with progressive values than not.

-Everyone - on both sides - kept suggesting that this election was probably the last gasp of old angry white dudes. I believe that will be true, even if I am surprised at how effective that last gasp was. (As a bonus, if Trump screws up healthcare like he's promised, those angriest oldest folks are less likely to have the care needed to be around in 2020.)

-The election should light a fire under everyone who has any ability to educate or influence education at any level. More than anything, this election was a condemnation of education, reason, logic, intellectualism, critical thought, and informed public discourse. On the one hand all of that's horrifying, but on the other it should force many of us to dramatically recognize the power of our chosen profession. We must do better. We must write, we must teach, we must lead.

-I still believe that Trump is pathologically narcissistic. I think that even the people who enthusiastically voted for him will soon learn that (if they didn't already know), and that when he acts based on his own self-interests, much of their support will sour. When they start criticizing him, Trump won't meaningfully engage them in that frustration - he'll likely just move to a position that's more centrist, where he thinks he'll get more love.

-Since he took many, many positions on the same issues over the course of the campaign, there are a lot of things Trump said that might turn out ok. He's promised to rebuild inner cities and return jobs there. Him and Clinton both suggested revitalizing our infrastructure was a priority, so maybe that will pan out. He has suggested that he might draw down our military and reduce a bit of our global empire - so that might be a good thing (?). I can find at least a dozen or so things here (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... -promises/) that I would be happy with - even if I don't necessarily like how he plans to get to those places. Of course there are many things there that terrify me too, but hopefully those can be checked by the power of our larger system.

I worry about the cabinet and about our foreign policy. I have no doubt things will get bad in some ways...but I also have hope that they will get better in others, and that the potential damage of a Trump presidency can be minimized. I have hope that our national con man extraordinaire just played his supporters like fools, and that through some combination of ineptitude, narcissism, and bombast, Trump will carve out his own path that befuddles us all, pleasing no one and setting him up to be as incredibly ineffective at doing anything meaningful in the presidency as he was at doing anything meaningful in his previous jobs.

--

The day before the election I also wrote this little thing, which I am now trying to reconcile with what I saw happen yesterday:

[prfsnl_gmr]

You say gaining a foothold, I say bending over Europe and having their way. Thus "cockblocking" is an adequate description.

Russia's economy is substantially smaller than Italy's and orders of magnitude smaller than Germany's. The EU is completely capable of defending itself, and while I do not agree that we should engage in a global protection racket, I do think that those countries should bear more of the cost associated with defending them. (They get to spend their tax revenue on social programs; we have to spend it on our military.) This is actually one of the few points on which I somewhat agree with Donald Trump.

As a businessman Trump said it right for the end of the Iraq war, we should have taken the oil. That statement to me emphasizes he will take care of America first over catering to other countries.

Emphatically, no. It is no longer the 18th Century, and our armed forces should not be put in harm's way for the purpose of pillage.

Finally, is this it for Hillary Clinton's political career?

Yes. She is henceforth the liberal equivalent of George W. Bush. The sooner she and her husband abandon politics and exits from public life, the better for the Democratic Party.

I think both parties are fucked. And more bluntly so -- NO parties won. Trump is no republican, the GOP didn't win.

I don't agree with you much, Tanooki, but I agree with you on this point. His victory was a complete loss for establishment politics. I think we will see more "outsider" candidates in coming years from both the right and the left looking to re-create Trump's success and appeal. IMO, that is not necessarily a bad thing.

Sec. Clinton was pretty clear about her desire to overturn the Heller decision on the individual right to bear arms, so I don't know if that's the best example.

The second amendment isn't much more ambiguous than the first. I am not a gun enthusiast, but I support the right to bear arms as much as I support the right to free exercise, speech, etc. (The Constitution guarantees what it guarantees. You don't get to pick and choose!) I would like to see more Democrats take this position, and I don't think it is necessarily incompatible with their positions on other issues.

Here's what I posted this morning to social media about all of this. I've been trying to push back on a lot of the despair I've seen around me, especially from my students and colleagues.

--

Things I am holding on to this morning to try and push down the nausea and push back the tears:

-The Supreme Court managed to be mostly ok most of the time even when Scalia was there, so one Trump replacement won't spell the end of everything. RBG is tough and can hold on, I am sure. Breyer can hold on, too, he's still in his 70s. Kennedy probably won't be keen on ceding his seat to Trump, and hopefully that is enough to keep him there. I feel like I can still reasonably hope that there won't be the kind of SCOTUS shakeup that people fear.

-Aside from the legally and fiscally dubious nature of many of Trump's more inane campaign proposals, there is also a lot of internal division in both parties that will still likely make things hard for Trump to pass much of what he may want to. Our system is bigger than the presidency, and the legislative and judicial obstructionism that defined much of Obama's presidency will likely also define much of Trump's.

-Trump's potential long-term damage can be reasonably mitigated in two years with a well-organized midterm election. The people have spoken - they don't want establishment politicians. The left has plenty of smart people that can meet that demand. If Trump actually defers to states on many policy issues (the way a good conservative would), his bad ideas will have less impact than they might otherwise. (Hillary's bad ideas, by contrast, would be something we'd likely all have had to deal with).

-There's going to be a lot of great punk music, hip-hop music, political documentaries, and other protest-focused art and media in the next four years. We may live in a world where Ted Nugent could play an inauguration, but we also live in a world where especially people under 40 are (statistically) listening closely and often to artists like Beyonce, Kendrick Lamar, Bon Iver, Adele, Lady Gaga, etc. whose politics are way more in line with progressive values than not.

-Everyone - on both sides - kept suggesting that this election was probably the last gasp of old angry white dudes. I believe that will be true, even if I am surprised at how effective that last gasp was. (As a bonus, if Trump screws up healthcare like he's promised, those angriest oldest folks are less likely to have the care needed to be around in 2020.)

-The election should light a fire under everyone who has any ability to educate or influence education at any level. More than anything, this election was a condemnation of education, reason, logic, intellectualism, critical thought, and informed public discourse. On the one hand all of that's horrifying, but on the other it should force many of us to dramatically recognize the power of our chosen profession. We must do better. We must write, we must teach, we must lead.

-I still believe that Trump is pathologically narcissistic. I think that even the people who enthusiastically voted for him will soon learn that (if they didn't already know), and that when he acts based on his own self-interests, much of their support will sour. When they start criticizing him, Trump won't meaningfully engage them in that frustration - he'll likely just move to a position that's more centrist, where he thinks he'll get more love.

-Since he took many, many positions on the same issues over the course of the campaign, there are a lot of things Trump said that might turn out ok. He's promised to rebuild inner cities and return jobs there. Him and Clinton both suggested revitalizing our infrastructure was a priority, so maybe that will pan out. He has suggested that he might draw down our military and reduce a bit of our global empire - so that might be a good thing (?). I can find at least a dozen or so things here (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... -promises/) that I would be happy with - even if I don't necessarily like how he plans to get to those places. Of course there are many things there that terrify me too, but hopefully those can be checked by the power of our larger system.

I worry about the cabinet and about our foreign policy. I have no doubt things will get bad in some ways...but I also have hope that they will get better in others, and that the potential damage of a Trump presidency can be minimized. I have hope that our national con man extraordinaire just played his supporters like fools, and that through some combination of ineptitude, narcissism, and bombast, Trump will carve out his own path that befuddles us all, pleasing no one and setting him up to be as incredibly ineffective at doing anything meaningful in the presidency as he was at doing anything meaningful in his previous jobs.

--

The day before the election I also wrote this little thing, which I am now trying to reconcile with what I saw happen yesterday:

Amazing post, DSH. I am quoting it here so that no one misses it.

[Exhuminator]

Russia's economy is substantially smaller than Italy's and orders of magnitude smaller than Germany's. The EU is completely capable of defending itself

It's more about how that economy is spent versus how big it is. Russia was in the top 5 countries by military expenditure last year. Italy wasn't even in the top 10. As far as military power goes, France leads Europe, not Italy or Germany. http://www.globalfirepower.com/countrie ... europe.asp

And if the EU is completely capable of defending itself, then perhaps Trump is right about USA's involvement in NATO.

[Ack]

You say gaining a foothold, I say bending over Europe and having their way. Thus "cockblocking" is an adequate description.

Russia's economy is substantially smaller than Italy's and orders of magnitude smaller than Germany's. The EU is completely capable of defending itself, and while I do not agree that we should engage in a global protection racket, I do think that those countries should bear more of the cost associated with defending them. (They get to spend their tax revenue on social programs; we have to spend it on our military.) This is actually one of the few points on which I somewhat agree with Donald Trump.

I disagree for several reasons:

1) The EU is obviously not held fast as a single entity, and Russia has proven adept at targeting its weaker members with various tactics, such as the annexation of Crimea or launching cyber warfare against Estonia. The EU is also geographically at a disadvantage because many of its weakest members are also former Soviet satellites that border Russia. The likes of France, Italy, and Germany could hold off a potential invasion. The likes of Romania, Bulgaria, and Hungary can not.

2) Russia may not have an enormous economy, but they are incredibly advanced in several realms of military tech, most notably cyber warfare, nuclear weapons, and ICBM technology. A decade ago, Russia was capable of knocking out Estonia's Internet through DDoS attacks. They've only continued to improve on their ability to launch such attacks. Meanwhile Russian missile technology has been developed with the specific goal of defeating missile shields and defense technology. The European Union's missile defense program is pulled largely from the US' program. Weakening defense ties may mean exposing European nations to greater threat from Russian missile attacks. Also note, Russia has the 5th largest military in the world in terms of total active personnel, the 3rd largest in terms of reserves, and the 6th largest in total potential troops in all categories.

3) Russia has an evolving but very aggressive nuclear policy which has at times in the past decade considered any potentially hostile act as cause to retaliate with nuclear arms, including situations such as they invade a nation and others come to that nation's defense. In short, depending on their interpretation of their own policy, they could potentially formally invade Crimea and then launch a nuclear strike on Ukraine when it steps up to defend. While I believe this scenario highly unlikely, it should never be forgotten that Russia's nuclear weapons program far outpaces most other nations.

4) A perception that the US is pulling away from NATO allies may mean Russia moves in and flips nations on a diplomatic level. Turkey is a prime possibility, especially if Russia manages to ensure Assad's government returns to power and offers arms to crush Kurdish rebel forces. While Turkey has always been a problem member, it could mean a severing of the connection to the Middle East and the economic benefits of sitting on China's Silk Road initiatives.

[Exhuminator]

Also note, Russia has the 5th largest military in the world in terms of total personnel, the 3rd largest in terms of reserves, and the 6th largest in total potential troops in all categories.

All that means as of 2015 Russia sat at number 2 on the military strength index:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... ngth_Index

In the top 5, the only country (currently) strongly vested against Russian annex-crawl is USA.

[prfsnl_gmr]

Also note, Russia has the 5th largest military in the world in terms of total personnel, the 3rd largest in terms of reserves, and the 6th largest in total potential troops in all categories.

All that means as of 2015 Russia sat at number 2 on the military strength index:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... ngth_Index

In the top 5, the only country (currently) strongly vested against Russian annex-crawl is USA.

Undoubtedly, Russia's military is incredibly strong compared to the rest of Europe, and it undoubtedly has imperial ambitions. My point is that France, Italy, Germany, Great Britain, etc. could each develop comparable militaries (despite their smaller populations) with relative east given the size of their economies. They just don't have any incentive to do so since they effectively "offshored" their defense to the United States during the cold war. While a military build up in Europe usually doesn't work out very well, asking some of those countries to contribute more to the cost of their defense is not completely unreasonable, IMO.

[J T]

...

[marurun]

Are you suggesting white supremacists did not turn out for Trump in droves and claim his cause as their cause? Are you saying Trump loudly repudiated their support when nobody was looking? Are you saying Trump's aggressive and brash campaign didn't empower those filled with latent, simmering racism and xenophobia to start speaking and acting on their beliefs more blatantly? Are you saying when my brown friends tell me they feel unsafe now that they are lying or are wrong? You are, like me, a white male, the most prominent beneficiary of embedded social and political advantage in the US. I see some of the systemic bias that quietly grants me advantage over women and people of any color not my own. It took a lot of work and introspection to become aware of it, but I cannot ignore it now that I know it's there. Maybe you need to look a little harder and you'll see it, too.

I know a few brown-skinned folk who are a lot more afraid to walk in their communities, now. They aren't Muslim, but it shouldn't matter either way. They know that this election will have emboldened some folks to act on prejudices in ways they wouldn't have pre-Trump.

All fed by (a now proven) librul media. All fed by manipulators to serve their own agendas and using minorities as pawns in their own game. Pathetic. There is a reason Trump took 30% of the hispanic vote; despite EVERY mainstream media declaring him racist, jingoist, and mysoginist. They also want to be protected, both in security and trade policy that accurately reacts to things other governments do.

[Ack]

Well, this should be entertaining.

[prfsnl_gmr]

Well, this should be entertaining.

Yep.

mjmjr25 has it pretty much all figured out, though; so, I am not sure that he is going to get a response, much less the well-reasoned and extensively researched one that his post so clearly deserves.