Guest post: "We can't compete with Trump's hate - and we shouldn't"

[JosephineMumsnet]

I'm not sure how many Brexits today is supposed to be worth. I started to lose count at around 3am. Then again, the shock is not quite the same as that of the morning of 24 June. If anything, given 2016's track record, it would have felt odd for the US election to go any other way.

Perhaps I have no right to be upset. After all, I'm not even American and even if I was, every expression of dismay will be that of a member of the smug liberal elite (since that is now what anyone who is not virulently right-wing has become). Even so, the parallels between politics in the UK and US seem to be overwhelming. We are witnessing a thuggish take-over by far-right bullies who pose as anti-establishment heroes, men who pretend to smash up the system while their own dominance remains untouched.

Donald Trump – just like the UK's Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage – is someone whose privilege has exempted him from having to follow the same rules as everyone else. He has been able to pose as a rule-breaker even though the normal rules of engagement never applied to him in the first place. Being a woman meant that Hillary Clinton could never have behaved as Trump did and got away with it. Yet precisely because of this she was dismissed as a member of the elite propping up the establishment. But Donald Trump is the establishment and it is rotten to the core.

George W Bush's victory in 2000 might have been bitterly disappointing – not to mention mired in controversy – but this is a disaster of a different order. Bush may have been racist, misogynist, classist, a warmonger, but he was within the bounds of what one might call a small-d democrat. Trump is not.

The dark turn taken by 2016 politics in both the UK and US has involved a shift to mob rule via the threat of violence. Mainstream UK newspapers call judges enemies of the state; Farage calls for Leave voters to take to the streets to 'get even' with politicians intent on 'watering down' the results of a vague, advisory referendum; a female politician is murdered in broad daylight by a far-right activist; and the man who hinted at the assassination of his female opponent is voted into the White House.

A contract has been broken. The likes of Trump and Farage would suggest that it is a contract that has enabled the elite to exploit the people. They would suggest that doing away with the superficial niceties of political discourse rightfully undermines those who use connections and educational advantage to manipulate others. But dispensing with the niceties means nothing if you replace them with threats and even more lies. It simply leaves us with nowhere to go.

I worry about how the left will respond to this disaster. Following Brexit many of us looked to ourselves, seeking refuge in self-blame. After all, if there's something you could have done, then perhaps you could do it now? But I do not want to see conversations about how Democrats should have listened more to 'the people’s' concerns about immigration and racial diversity. Plenty of those who voted for Trump were not the dispossessed; they were white college-educated men, drunk on years of being told that their dominance was under threat. There is no point in the left attempting to appease people who think this way. You just become a fellow hater, albeit someone whose mediocre, half-hearted hate can never compete with the full-blooded, unbridled hatred of men like Trump.

We need something more solid than that. This morning JK Rowling – whom I'd love as our PM – tweeted this: "We stand together. We stick up for the vulnerable. We challenge bigots. We don't let hate speech become normalised. We hold the line." That is what we must do. That is all that we can do. We know who is put most at risk by Trump's victory. The worst thing we could do is to sell them out on the basis that a politics that represents everyone is just too much to ask.

Rich white men are a minority. They do not have the right to intimidate everyone else into submission. This particular battle may be lost but people with compassion, love and the will to do right are not going anywhere.

[merrymouse]

I mean the people who determine policy, so Farage is not elite because no one listens to him.

[Tropezienne]

Toynbee is a disgrace on Hillary. I wouldn't read another article by her if you paid me.

Yes Trump is unfit for office, an ignoramus supreme in fact and I think we all have reason to be very concerned. His Global warming denial (Chinese hoax) isn't the least of it either. His wish to renegotiate all the different trade agreements could trigger a terrible world wide recession. Defaulting on US' national debt etc. This is deeply troubling.

Of course he's a member of the 'elite', but essentially, he was not a member of the political establishment. That was his whole appeal I think. I get the feeling his brashness, his bullying persona is a bit of an act. I actually think he's more balanced, subtle and pragmatic than he appears in public. I dont though think he's a knowledgeable person who has the temperament for presidency. I think Trump knows nothing of the world outside him and he doesn't care that he knows nothing about it.

Trump is like a cliche of a arrogant rich man. He brags about his wealth when he's probably lying. He stood at the podium lying and he was so vacuous. He said meaningless things over and over. He keeps saying "it'll be wonderful, beautiful" etc. He hasn't said anything remotely insightful or interesting the entire campaign. He was all bombast, bluster and ignorance.

Claig I admire you. I think you've stood your ground on here and remained factual and civil despite a lot of personal attack and piss taking silliness aimed at you. But you seem to believe that Trump's going to morph into a remarkable, insightful shrewd statesman when in office? I really think you are dreaming. I think we've had the best of him actually. Trump has ideas about what America should do that are only anchored to nothing other than his personal urges. He's spent months publicly worrying about Obama's birth certificate. Anyone other candidate than Hillary Clinton would have beaten him IMO.

The globalist, free-trade, open borders economic system has only itself to blame.

[claig]

This is what has really happened as reported in teh New York Times headline

"Donald Trump’s Victory Promises to Upend the International Order

Donald J. Trump’s stunning election victory on Tuesday night rippled way beyond the nation’s boundaries, upending an international order that prevailed for decades and raising profound questions about America’s place in the world.

For the first time since before World War II, Americans chose a president who promised to reverse the internationalism practiced by predecessors of both parties and to build walls both physical and metaphorical. Mr. Trump’s win foreshadowed an America more focused on its own affairs while leaving the world to take care of itself.

The outsider revolution that propelled him to power over the Washington establishment of both political parties also reflected a fundamental shift in international politics evidenced already this year by events like Britain’s referendum vote to leave the European Union. Mr. Trump’s success could fuel the populist, nativist, nationalist, closed-border movements already so evident in Europe and spreading to other parts of the world."

www.nytimes.com/2016/11/09/world/donald-trumps-victory-promises-to-upend-the-international-order.html?_r=0

This is a revolution, it dwarfs Brexit and it has put the noses of very powerful elites out of joint because they will lose power, it has absolutely nothing to do with "hate" although we seem to be being told that by some Oxbridge graduates on the Guardian.

Black and white people voted for Brexit and black, Latino and the majority of white women and the majority of white men voted for Trump. It has nothing to do with a "whitelash" or "hate" but that is what some people want to tell us so that people are divided.

[Southallgirl]

they underestimated Trump, they thought he was a clown and that Hillary, the experienced politician, would easily beat him. But people knew that she was doing the bidding of Wall Street

Hi Claig, nice to see you again. I'm just wondering how Wall St will get their revenge on Mrs Clinton. Afterall, after bankrolling her they cannot return empty-handed. (I'm referencing Night of the Demon, by the way).

[claig]

'Claig I admire you. I think you've stood your ground on here and remained factual and civil despite a lot of personal attack and piss taking silliness aimed at you. But you seem to believe that Trump's going to morph into a remarkable, insightful shrewd statesman when in office? I really think you are dreaming'

Thanks, Tropezienne. This is not the thread to go into detail about what Trump is all about because it is a huge subject, but we are being told by the BBC that Trump is stupid and a racist etc, but Trump is far cleverer than they give him credit for. He has just won an election against all the odds that even the BBC says is the biggest upset in the entire 240 years history of the United States. I think we will all see that he knows exactly what he is doing and that is to "Upend the International Order" as the New York Times says and a lot of very powerful people are unhappy about that and the fact that he won, so divide and rule is the only way they can counter Trump, which is why we will be hearing much, much more about a "whitelash" and "hate" on our news and that is very divisive as well as wrong.

[PausingFlatly]

But I asked what you mean by "elite"?

You use the word a very great deal, but often seem to mean something different from the normal meaning.

I've seen you apply it to people I wouldn't necessarily think of as in the top 1% or having lots of power.

And over the years I've seen you hold up various people as anti-elite heroes when they're clearly in the top 1%. Actually I've just checked Trump, and he's in the top 0.001%.

[PausingFlatly]

Sorry, didn't refresh so x-posted with yours at 18:05.

I'm not sure I really understand your post though.

Unions, for example, have often helped determine policy. I'm not sure that makes cleaners or nurses the elite?

And Farage is a wealthy (though not by Trump's standards) MEP. He's been taking a taxpayer-funded salary for years to make policy.

(I think he'd be pretty insulted by you saying no-one listens to him, given his post-ref speech to the European Parliament - but that's a different matter!)

[claig]

'I'm just wondering how Wall St will get their revenge on Mrs Clinton. '

Hi, Southallgirl. This was the reaction of some Wall Street traders, but they are just ordinary people, workers. The really powerful Wall Street people will dump her because she no longer has any power and will never likely ever have it again so there is nothing they can gain from her.

"Wall Street NYSE traders chant 'lock her up' and BOO as Hillary Clinton concedes

LOUD booing swept across Wall Street as traders chanted for Hillary Clinton to be locked up following her catastrophic defeat in the US elections."

www.express.co.uk/news/world/730672/Hillary-Clinton-booed-New-York-Stock-Exchange-US-election-2016

[claig]

'Unions, for example, have often helped determine policy.'

No, those policies are minor. What the really powerful care about is wars and globalisation and the unions have no real power there which is why a servant like Blair never really listened to them much. Two million people marched against war with Iraq, and some unions were probably against it too, but it made no difference to a servant like Blair.

Paul McCartney is wealthier than Farage, but he doesn't decide anything that counts and nor does Farage.

[claig]

Although Farage had a huge effect in "upending the international order" by winning Brexit and Trump has now dwarfed that and created the biggest revolution since the French Revolution by winning his election.

[Southallgirl]

A 6 yr old came home and told his mother (an acquaintance of mine) that a man "was going to build a big wall to stop poor people getting food". This is just one idea kids are being taught, and it must be from home.

[Goldiegirl13]

The thing that worries me most about Trump or Brexit is the extreme negativity that appears online in the aftermath. We seem to have become a world of spoilt children complaining and whinging because we haven't got our way. Whatever the outcome of a public vote, generally 50% aren't going to be happy. But what sort of example are we setting to our children by behaving in such a negative way because we haven't got what we want. A lot of the post-Trump articles I have read predict Armageddon. Our children increasingly have access to social media and are being terrified by outrageous scaremongering. Shouldn't we be teaching tolerance of other's opinions and offering explanations for them and positive views of how we can make things better instead of the doom and gloom I have been reading? If we don't, surely we are no better than those we disagree with. So let's stop throwing the toys out of our prams, be grateful that we live in a democracy (even if we don't always like the result), think about what we post online and the audience it might reach and give our children a positive outlook for their future lives.

[Southallgirl]

Hear, hear, Goldiegirl.

[Tropezienne]

well said Goldiegirl

[Southallgirl]

Our children increasingly have access to social media and are being terrified by outrageous scaremongering

This particularly resonates for me because a report on mental health in schoolchildren has found that anxiety is very prevalent, even in junior school ages.

[Goldiegirl13]

Thank you southallgirl - I can confirm that, as my daughter was treated for anxiety at age 10. It is becoming scarcely common amongst primary school children.

[Goldiegirl13]

Thank you x

[roseship]

Here's a more reasoned examination of why Trump won.

www.propublica.org/article/revenge-of-the-forgotten-class

Not because women endorsed racism and sexual assault, this wasn't a vote for Trump the man, but for a message.

Just as Labour voters were taken for granted in the UK, and responded by voting for UKIP and Brexit, in the US they were taken for granted by the Democrats and they responded by electing Trump.

[Pluto30]

Gets uptight about being called a member of the smug liberal elite

Calls other people thuggish bullies and posers

Also:

Being a woman meant that Hillary Clinton could never have behaved as Trump did and got away with it.

I see we're still on this. Clinton didn't lose the election because she was a woman; she lost the election because she was the wrong woman. A woman who has a very questionable history; a woman who has done nothing to condemn her husband's actions; a woman who has a political history draped in scandal and controversy; a woman who thought she could win based purely on being a woman, and being "not Trump". A lot of people would've supported a different woman.

But Donald Trump is the establishment and it is rotten to the core.

He's not the establishment. The establishment is the banks, Wall St, the media, the parties etc. Trump was, in no way, a part of that. He was a total outside. He's a part of the elite, yes, but he is not a part of the establishment.

George W Bush's victory in 2000 might have been bitterly disappointing – not to mention mired in controversy – but this is a disaster of a different order. Bush may have been racist, misogynist, classist, a warmonger, but he was within the bounds of what one might call a small-d democrat. Trump is not.

You're right. Racism, classism, misogyny, warmongering are all on different levels. Some racism is worse than other racism, you're totally right.

Don't forget, George W Bush took us into an illegal war that has escalated global tensions, has given rise to ISIS, has caused the deaths of millions, and has, fundamentally, helped Trump to get to where he is.

Plenty of those who voted for Trump were not the dispossessed; they were white college-educated men, drunk on years of being told that their dominance was under threat.

If someone is told implicitly or implicitly that they are the root of all evil for long enough, they're eventually going to get the shits with it. The Black Lives Matter movement etc. have, again, facilitated Trump's win.

You just become a fellow hater, albeit someone whose mediocre, half-hearted hate can never compete with the full-blooded, unbridled hatred of men like Trump.

Oh, shut up. You're spewing vitriol like it's your first language. Look at what you're calling Trump and his supporters (or implying about them), and then tell me this again.

This morning JK Rowling – whom I'd love as our PM

You would.

[Goldiegirl13]

*scarely (bloomin auto correct)

[mimishimmi]

The racism and misogynistic comments may have have been an act to secure the votes (although a very risky move which could have backfired spectacularly). Every video I've watched of him before he decided to run for the Presidency, he's a very sharp, astute straight-shooter who didn't talk anything like the idiot he portrayed himself to be during the electoral run up. Unless he has dementia or something, personalities don't change that much.

I think that's why they are scared of him because he has the potential to expose them all and boy are there some state 'secrets' which are not really so secret actually... but they still don't want people in a pisition of power calling them out on it. He was complaining about the close relationships with Saudi Arabia and the billions spent on providing military protection to other countries long before 9/11 - back in the 80s actually. There are some very powerful people who don't want those very cozy arrangements threatened. I think he's actually at risk of assassination from the inside.

Just type in 'old Trump interviews' on Youtube and watch some.

[Pluto30]

Agreed, mimi.

Right up until he announced his intention to run in 2015, he came across as very rational and intelligent. His ideology hasn't changed in at least 36 years, and he predicted a lot of the problems the US is currently facing.

I do think he's flawed, but I think he also "trolled" people to garner up the passion that Clinton was unable to. He's not dumb. He knew what he needed to do to win, and I don't think he's going to be anywhere near the godawful leader that people assume.

[WrongTrouser]

OP when you get to the point where what you say (and presumably what you think) is riven with massive contradictions, don't you think it's perhaps time to take stock and start questioning yourself?

We stand together. We stick up for the vulnerable. We challenge bigots. We don't let hate speech become normalised. We hold the line

I think your post does none of these. In fact it does the opposite. It is divisive and dismissive of the actual experiences of others (as they perceive their lives, their hopes and fears, not as you see them).

Rich white men are a minority. They do not have the right to intimidate everyone else into submission. This particular battle may be lost but people with compassion, love and the will to do right are not going anywhere.

No, not seeing much love or compassion in your post either. And in order for us to be able to "do the right thing" I think we first need to stop vilifying those who disagree with us and try to instead understand why others see the world differently, you know, almost as if they were human beings of equal worth to us.

Also are there really 47 million rich white men in America? Blimey.

And I do hope you weren't trying to imply that everyone on the left voted Remain? Perhaps I am reading too much into your words but not every one on the left follows the Polly Toynbee/Guardian-at-its-worst line.

[noblegiraffe]

I think he also "trolled" people to garner up the passion that Clinton was unable to.

He didn't garner up passion, he stirred up hatred. These are real people he was 'trolling' and there will be real consequences. I've seen on Twitter that a racist backlash has started against ordinary people, just like there was post-Brexit.

It wasn't a fucking game. Trolling. FFS.

[derxa]

think that's why they are scared of him because he has the potential to expose them all and boy are there some state 'secrets' which are not really so secret actually... but they still don't want people in a pisition of power calling them out on it. He was complaining about the close relationships with Saudi Arabia and the billions spent on providing military protection to other countries long before 9/11 - back in the 80s actually. There are some very powerful people who don't want those very cozy arrangements threatened. I think he's actually at risk of assassination from the inside I actually fear for Trump's life because he's stumbled on something very horrible.