Is Trump an Agent or an Accident of History?

[ltlee1]

"In Isaac Asimov’s Foundation novels, a “psychohistorian” in a far-flung galactic empire figures out a way to predict the future so exactly that he can anticipate both the empire’s fall and the way that civilization can be painstakingly rebuilt. This enables him to plan a project — the “foundation” of the title — that will long outlast his death, complete with periodic messages to his heirs that always show foreknowledge of their challenges and crises.

Until one day the foreknowledge fails, because an inherently unpredictable figure has come upon the scene — the Mule, a Napoleon of galactic politics, whose advent was hard for even a psychohistorian to see coming because he’s literally a mutant, graced by some genetic twist with the power of telepathy.

Donald Trump is not a mutant telepath. (Or so I assume — fact checkers are still at work.) But the debates about how to deal with his challenge to the American political system turn, in part, on how much you think that he resembles Asimov’s Mule.

Was there a more normal, conventional, stable-seeming timeline for 21st century American politics that Trump, with his unique blend of tabloid celebrity, reality-TV charisma, personal shamelessness and demagogic intuition, somehow wrenched us off?

Or is Trump just an American expression of the trends that have revived nationalism all over the world, precisely the sort of figure a “psychohistory” of our era would have anticipated? In which case, are attempts to find some elite removal mechanism likely to just heighten the contradictions that yielded Trumpism in the first place, widening the gyre and bringing the rough beast slouching in much faster?"

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/06/opinion/trump-election-2024.html

[ltlee1]

Post by ltlee1
"In Isaac Asimov’s Foundation novels, a “psychohistorian” in a far-flung galactic empire figures out a way to predict the future so exactly that he can anticipate both the empire’s fall and the way that civilization can be painstakingly rebuilt. This enables him to plan a project — the “foundation” of the title — that will long outlast his death, complete with periodic messages to his heirs that always show foreknowledge of their challenges and crises.
Until one day the foreknowledge fails, because an inherently unpredictable figure has come upon the scene — the Mule, a Napoleon of galactic politics, whose advent was hard for even a psychohistorian to see coming because he’s literally a mutant, graced by some genetic twist with the power of telepathy.
Donald Trump is not a mutant telepath. (Or so I assume — fact checkers are still at work.) But the debates about how to deal with his challenge to the American political system turn, in part, on how much you think that he resembles Asimov’s Mule.
Was there a more normal, conventional, stable-seeming timeline for 21st century American politics that Trump, with his unique blend of tabloid celebrity, reality-TV charisma, personal shamelessness and demagogic intuition, somehow wrenched us off?
Or is Trump just an American expression of the trends that have revived nationalism all over the world, precisely the sort of figure a “psychohistory” of our era would have anticipated? In which case, are attempts to find some elite removal mechanism likely to just heighten the contradictions that yielded Trumpism in the first place, widening the gyre and bringing the rough beast slouching in much faster?"

Douthat had published "The Decadent Society: How We Became the Victim of Our Own Sucess" about 3 years ago.
He had spent several chapters argueing that American decadence was sustainable.
Chapter 5: Comfortably Numb;
Chapter 6: A Kindly Despotism;
Chapter 7: Waiting for Barbarian, and
Chapter 8: Giving Decadence Its Due.

Briefly, American decadent society is comfortably numb for most citizens. Many are frustrated and angry. These
people would act out but large scale violence such a civil war is unlikely. Many would succumb to opiates which
are downers. They would suffered silently and lonely. But for the millions, lives would go on. Decadence would
also make KIND Despotism tolerable hence no immediate cause of revolution. The society as a whole may be
waiting for barbarian such as global Islamic uprising and/or Chinese aggression. But then such barbarians might
never come. Decadence is also a sign of strength.

Trump and the play-acting like Jan 6th Insurgence certainly fit into the dynamics of American decadent society.
But then the more serious question is the linkage between American electoral democracy and decadence. It would
be the real Chicken and Egg question.

Ross Douthat's book had been previously discussed in soc.culture.china. Url below:
https://groups.google.com/g/soc.culture.china/c/YW2L8HOhuiA/m/FPgBiSY4IQAJ

[ltlee1]

Post by ltlee1
"In Isaac Asimov’s Foundation novels, a “psychohistorian” in a far-flung galactic empire figures out a way to predict the future so exactly that he can anticipate both the empire’s fall and the way that civilization can be painstakingly rebuilt. This enables him to plan a project — the “foundation” of the title — that will long outlast his death, complete with periodic messages to his heirs that always show foreknowledge of their challenges and crises.
Until one day the foreknowledge fails, because an inherently unpredictable figure has come upon the scene — the Mule, a Napoleon of galactic politics, whose advent was hard for even a psychohistorian to see coming because he’s literally a mutant, graced by some genetic twist with the power of telepathy.
Donald Trump is not a mutant telepath. (Or so I assume — fact checkers are still at work.) But the debates about how to deal with his challenge to the American political system turn, in part, on how much you think that he resembles Asimov’s Mule.
Was there a more normal, conventional, stable-seeming timeline for 21st century American politics that Trump, with his unique blend of tabloid celebrity, reality-TV charisma, personal shamelessness and demagogic intuition, somehow wrenched us off?
Or is Trump just an American expression of the trends that have revived nationalism all over the world, precisely the sort of figure a “psychohistory” of our era would have anticipated? In which case, are attempts to find some elite removal mechanism likely to just heighten the contradictions that yielded Trumpism in the first place, widening the gyre and bringing the rough beast slouching in much faster?"

Douthat had published "The Decadent Society: How We Became the Victim of Our Own Sucess" about 3 years ago.
He had spent several chapters argueing that American decadence was sustainable.
Chapter 5: Comfortably Numb;
Chapter 6: A Kindly Despotism;
Chapter 7: Waiting for Barbarian, and
Chapter 8: Giving Decadence Its Due.
Briefly, American decadent society is comfortably numb for most citizens. Many are frustrated and angry. These
people would act out but large scale violence such a civil war is unlikely. Many would succumb to opiates which
are downers. They would suffered silently and lonely. But for the millions, lives would go on. Decadence would
also make KIND Despotism tolerable hence no immediate cause of revolution. The society as a whole may be
waiting for barbarian such as global Islamic uprising and/or Chinese aggression. But then such barbarians might
never come. Decadence is also a sign of strength.
Trump and the play-acting like Jan 6th Insurgence certainly fit into the dynamics of American decadent society.
But then the more serious question is the linkage between American electoral democracy and decadence. It would
be the real Chicken and Egg question.
https://groups.google.com/g/soc.culture.china/c/YW2L8HOhuiA/m/FPgBiSY4IQAJ

Douthat listed 4 signs of American decadence. They are
1) Stagnation, mainly economically but also entrepreurship and innovation.
2) Sterility
3) Sclerosis
4) Repetition.

Sclerosis, or demosclerosis, is actually also the cause of decadence. Democracy is supposedly the process or tool in which the society could strike bargain which is best for all. But minority interests dominated and hence undemocratic politics stands in the
way. Demosclerosis and Decadence reinforce each other.

"Calcification, a kind of spreading dry rot accompanied by a bloating of the body politic, spreads across the American landscape.
It’s a disease that saps the strength of the people who, ironically, are the ones who demand more and more from a government that gives them, in the end, less and less. ...

National Journal contributing editor Jonathan Rauch coins a clever word “demosclerosis” to describe the process. The process is spread by the mushrooming of special-interest organizations who gather virtually every affected and disaffected voter into groups and counter-groups (witness, e.g., the pro-choice vs. the pro-life groups) who pressure Congress and state legislatures to do their bidding. Or else.
...
Mr. Rauch notes that the trick of political success is to fashion special-interest access and accommodation, to gather votes and financial support, to weld blocs and interests—James Madison called them “factions—together into a winning majority. Hence no program can be cut, no tax break wiped out, no privilege lifted, without provoking the anger of one organized interest or another. The political art is to calm anger and get everybody under the government tent—a tent that eventually gets blown away. Meanwhile, the budget grows and the dollar sinks, the state swells and the individual shrinks.

Mr. Rauch points out that seven out of ten Americans belong to at least one association, and one in four belongs to four or more. He describes one modest-sized Washington building directory as boasting the following tenants (and there’s a lot more beyond the letter C):

Advertising Council
Affiliated Hotels and Resorts
Agudath Israel of America
American Arbitration Association
American Federation of Clinical Research
Americans for Economic Renewal
Center for the Advancement of Health
Congress of Russian Americans
Consortium for the Study of Intelligence

Thus the emergence of America’s “parasite economy,” its vast lobbying industry centered in Washington, its horde of lawyers with their Gucci loafers and leather attache cases attending hearings and buttonholing Congressmen and bureaucrats who find the attention too sweet to resist. So why resist?

Mr. Rauch credits much of his understanding of how government really works to public choice economist Mancur Olson of the University of Maryland and his 1965 book, The Logic of Collective Action. Professor Olson, like Tocqueville before him, sees the mischief of interest-group democracy, sees groups push projects with concentrated benefits and diffused costs- costs foisted on a “rationally ignorant” populace."

https://fee.org/articles/demosclerosis-the-silent-killer-of-american-government/

[ltlee1]

Post by ltlee1

Post by ltlee1
"In Isaac Asimov’s Foundation novels, a “psychohistorian” in a far-flung galactic empire figures out a way to predict the future so exactly that he can anticipate both the empire’s fall and the way that civilization can be painstakingly rebuilt. This enables him to plan a project — the “foundation” of the title — that will long outlast his death, complete with periodic messages to his heirs that always show foreknowledge of their challenges and crises.
Until one day the foreknowledge fails, because an inherently unpredictable figure has come upon the scene — the Mule, a Napoleon of galactic politics, whose advent was hard for even a psychohistorian to see coming because he’s literally a mutant, graced by some genetic twist with the power of telepathy.
Donald Trump is not a mutant telepath. (Or so I assume — fact checkers are still at work.) But the debates about how to deal with his challenge to the American political system turn, in part, on how much you think that he resembles Asimov’s Mule.
Was there a more normal, conventional, stable-seeming timeline for 21st century American politics that Trump, with his unique blend of tabloid celebrity, reality-TV charisma, personal shamelessness and demagogic intuition, somehow wrenched us off?
Or is Trump just an American expression of the trends that have revived nationalism all over the world, precisely the sort of figure a “psychohistory” of our era would have anticipated? In which case, are attempts to find some elite removal mechanism likely to just heighten the contradictions that yielded Trumpism in the first place, widening the gyre and bringing the rough beast slouching in much faster?"

Douthat had published "The Decadent Society: How We Became the Victim of Our Own Sucess" about 3 years ago.
He had spent several chapters argueing that American decadence was sustainable.
Chapter 5: Comfortably Numb;
Chapter 6: A Kindly Despotism;
Chapter 7: Waiting for Barbarian, and
Chapter 8: Giving Decadence Its Due.
Briefly, American decadent society is comfortably numb for most citizens. Many are frustrated and angry. These
people would act out but large scale violence such a civil war is unlikely. Many would succumb to opiates which
are downers. They would suffered silently and lonely. But for the millions, lives would go on. Decadence would
also make KIND Despotism tolerable hence no immediate cause of revolution. The society as a whole may be
waiting for barbarian such as global Islamic uprising and/or Chinese aggression. But then such barbarians might
never come. Decadence is also a sign of strength.
Trump and the play-acting like Jan 6th Insurgence certainly fit into the dynamics of American decadent society.
But then the more serious question is the linkage between American electoral democracy and decadence. It would
be the real Chicken and Egg question.
https://groups.google.com/g/soc.culture.china/c/YW2L8HOhuiA/m/FPgBiSY4IQAJ

Douthat listed 4 signs of American decadence. They are
1) Stagnation, mainly economically but also entrepreurship and innovation.
2) Sterility
3) Sclerosis
4) Repetition.
Sclerosis, or demosclerosis, is actually also the cause of decadence. Democracy is supposedly the process or tool in which the society could strike bargain which is best for all. But minority interests dominated and hence undemocratic politics stands in the
way. Demosclerosis and Decadence reinforce each other.
"Calcification, a kind of spreading dry rot accompanied by a bloating of the body politic, spreads across the American landscape.
It’s a disease that saps the strength of the people who, ironically, are the ones who demand more and more from a government that gives them, in the end, less and less. ...
National Journal contributing editor Jonathan Rauch coins a clever word “demosclerosis” to describe the process. The process is spread by the mushrooming of special-interest organizations who gather virtually every affected and disaffected voter into groups and counter-groups (witness, e.g., the pro-choice vs. the pro-life groups) who pressure Congress and state legislatures to do their bidding. Or else.
...
Mr. Rauch notes that the trick of political success is to fashion special-interest access and accommodation, to gather votes and financial support, to weld blocs and interests—James Madison called them “factions—together into a winning majority. Hence no program can be cut, no tax break wiped out, no privilege lifted, without provoking the anger of one organized interest or another. The political art is to calm anger and get everybody under the government tent—a tent that eventually gets blown away. Meanwhile, the budget grows and the dollar sinks, the state swells and the individual shrinks.
Advertising Council
Affiliated Hotels and Resorts
Agudath Israel of America
American Arbitration Association
American Federation of Clinical Research
Americans for Economic Renewal
Center for the Advancement of Health
Congress of Russian Americans
Consortium for the Study of Intelligence
Thus the emergence of America’s “parasite economy,” its vast lobbying industry centered in Washington, its horde of lawyers with their Gucci loafers and leather attache cases attending hearings and buttonholing Congressmen and bureaucrats who find the attention too sweet to resist. So why resist?
Mr. Rauch credits much of his understanding of how government really works to public choice economist Mancur Olson of the University of Maryland and his 1965 book, The Logic of Collective Action. Professor Olson, like Tocqueville before him, sees the mischief of interest-group democracy, sees groups push projects with concentrated benefits and diffused costs- costs foisted on a “rationally ignorant” populace."
https://fee.org/articles/demosclerosis-the-silent-killer-of-american-government/

"Parasite economy" with its vast lobbying industry centered in Washington would make millions of
voters participating in the election more or less ritualistic. They participate in the "democratic process"
not because what this or that candidate would or could improve their livinghood but per their faith or
identity. It is not they are stupid. Rather, they are dealt bad hands.

The following from "Strangers in their Own Land: Anger and Mourning on the American Right".

"Like other friends and family, the Arenos are Republican and had voted in the
presidential election of 2012 for Mitt Romney. “He’s a big business guy, of course,”
Harold explains. “If he were here he’d be having friendly visits with the CEOs of the
companies around here. He wouldn’t be cleaning up the mess.”
...
But Republicans put God and family on their side and “we like that. The Scripture
says Jesus wants us to be about his Father’s business,” Annette says. Their faith
had guided them through a painful loss of family, friends, neighbors, frogs, turtles,
and trees. They felt God had blessed them with this courage to face their ordeals,
and they thanked Him for that. “I don’t know what people do if they don’t know Him,”
Annette adds. For the Arenos, religious faith has moved into the very cultural space
in which politics might have played a vital, independent role. Politics hadn’t helped,
they felt, and the Bible surely had."