During and after last night’s election debate (which I
hesitate to call “presidential”), I’ve seen a lot of fact-checking, particularly
of things that Trump said.
I worry that fact-checking someone like Donald Trump will
have little or no effect. Trump himself will just tell another lie and keep
telling it until that lie becomes inconvenient. And his supporters seem to
exhibit a sort of religious attitude toward him and whatever they think he said
or did or didn’t do.
Actual, verifiable facts don’t really matter when your
attitude is “Trump said it, I believe it, that settles it.” The Trump-isms that
complement the believers’ attitudes and hopes for ‘Murica, they quote and
fetishize, while either ignoring or being ignorant of the inconsistencies and
the morally problematic history. And anyone who is not one of the faithful is a
tool of evil, trying to replace the Messiah-Trump with Lady-Satan (or, as she’s
known in her human form, Hillary Clinton).
For me, just like with religions, perhaps the saddest part
is that not all Trump supporters are ignorant hillbilly-types whose critical
thinking skills only extend as far as what to order from the value menu and who
to vote for on American Idol. There are reasonably well-educated people who
will twist and turn and do all manner of mental gymnastics to defend the idea
that Trump can actually do any of the things he talks about doing as president,
and making America great again. I think we should start calling these people “Trump
apologists”. Just like with religious apologists, I am confused when otherwise
intelligent people put so much effort into trying to craft an intellectual defense
of something that is inherently anti-intellectual.
No comments:
Post a Comment