October 10th, 2016

Harriet Vane

We must not legitimize a potential dictator

On last week's  "town hall meeting" (which these are not), he threatened to punish his opponent because she is running against him. He showed himself to be lawless, but he will first thnig put her in jail. Need I say that's not democracy. A court of law after scrutinizing her and her email intensely found there was nothing indictable done. Last night's tweets from Trump included threats to retaliate against Republicans who are unendorsing him.He promises to immediately set about destroying our republic.

He can set up a dictatorship: for example, go to violent war if he wants to. He has said he will grab the natural resources of other countries: Iran's oil.  Consider how he can replace the present generals and appoint those who will do all his bidding. There are people who would do this for a promotion and all that brings.

It would have left me shaking to watch his viciousness and this spectacle of him stalking behind Hillary Clinton. We must not legitimize this man. Anyone who is unwilling to say those endorsing Trump are endorsing something deeply harmful that they know is deeply harmful are in effect legitimizing him.

On last night's debate, he threw further crucial wrenches into the machinery of democracy. First he will not honor the results of an election.  Were this the 17th century he'd go to war, himself rig an election, throw his opponents in jaill. Or simply go to war if the other side won. He revealed that beneath the pretenses of claimingin voter fraud and claiming Obama has no US birth cetfificate is the real fundamental objection he has to democracy.  He said sections of the population should not have the right to vote. Rightly,,Clinton responded: "That's horrifying.'  He brought Obama's half-brother to the arena: in his and his followers' estimation Obama is illegitimate because he's black. Having  black man who is a relative there pointed that out.  Citizens United made money equal free speech, Hobby Lobby is eroding a fundamental right to toleration for other religious groups, other ethical beliefs. He'd appoint supreme court judges who would begin to destroy the right to vote for everyone, the right to live and believe according to individual belief systems (as long as they are not murderous of other people). He'd do what he could to repress the press: "opne the libel" laws.

Fascism is profoundly against democracy. Friom an article by
Christopher Hedges article on Sheldon Wolin's  inverted totalitarianism:

"Fascism, at its core, is an amorphous and incoherent ideology that perpetuates itself by celebrating a grotesque hypermasculinity, elements of which are captured in Trump’s misogyny. It allows disenfranchised people to feel a sense of power and to have their rage sanctified. It takes a politically marginalized and depoliticized population and mobilizes it around a utopian vision of moral renewal and vengeance and an anointed political savior. It is always militaristic, anti-intellectual and contemptuous of democracy and replaces culture with nationalist and patriotic kitsch. It sees those outside the closed circle of the nation-state or the ethnic or religious group as diseased enemies that must be physically purged to restore the health of nation." (thanks to my friend, Diane, who quoted this and described its context when we were discussing Virginia Woolf's Three Guineas)

When the newspapers treat the two candidates as equivalent, when they report incessantly about him, they legitimize him. Some newspapers do not, but most two and just about all TV news shows.

Miss Drake