American antics are human antics

The infamous September 10 debate catastrophe predictably made its way into popular internet memes, for example:


or this slightly more abstract humor with a very concerned-looking cat:


I have to admit, I enjoy the comic relief. I've also been expecting to see it in clever music videos, and sure enough:

https://x.com/notcapnamerica/status/1834333612902142023?t=V7VfS2X8f7Tb8bB5srchIg

https://x.com/thekiffness/status/1834585071875158502?t=V7VfS2X8f7Tb8bB5srchIg

The first one is dope, very energetic and catchy, also I like the little echo at the end. The second one is more chill and plaintive. There's almost a danger that people might not understand it is being facetious. More on that later.

I assume the reader will not be surprised to learn that Trump is defensive over his unbelievable performance; he maintains he won the debate handily. He won so hard that out of pity for his adversary he will not partake in another. He also laments that the fact-checking was completely inappropriate and unfair. Meanwhile there is an army of followers searching for some evidence (though that was never really the point). Nothing still? How about a wild duck, perhaps a goose... Literally a wild goose chase, it seems... Some have posited the existence of a liberal media bent on concealing the evidence they seek. Some evangelicals, I kid you not, have even claimed that the libs cheated during the debate by using witchcraft. How else could Harris appear to have received such a boost in the polls from a debate the supreme leader clearly won?

Still, a number of people who lean right politically seem to have finally given up on Trump after watching the debate, noting that his unwillingness to give a straight answer on whether he supports Ukraine's sovereignty from Russia is somehow even worse than the ludicrous attack on immigrants, especially in the context of the revelations about Russia getting caught bankrolling popular right wing influencers and basically telling them exactly what to say. OK, not sure which is worse, but that's also a valid point. Regardless, it's about time, welcome back to reality. Anybody else still hanging on, and deeply concerned for the Springfield Pets, maybe watch this conservative-friendly debunker to get some context on how the pets myth likely started: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0dPRxxqs-c

Many people reading this lean more towards progressive, and to them I offer my solidarity and condolences over the ridiculous things we are witnessing, but also a caution: when making fun of a ridiculous thing, it's easy to assume nobody could possibly be crazy enough to believe it, but time and time again, that assumption has proven incorrect, and so be wary of how such people might incorrectly interpret the humorous response, particularly regarding something as volatile as basically a blood libel against a particular group of people. It is so absurd it's hilarious, but also, they are having to close schools in Springfield due to bomb threats--not quite as funny.

One of the ways cults lock people in is that the prophet, by definition, can not be wrong. This becomes a basic tenet. And to think otherwise would be to admit being willfully taken in by a wicked farce, which is so psychologically painful that we seek another explanation--instead there must be an external conspiracy to embarrass the prophet. It sounds silly when you analyze it from the outside, but there are a lot of cults; I think human beings are more vulnerable than we'd like to imagine. So I recommend reading books about the techniques they use, such as Cultish by Amanda Montell, relating to the language patterns of cults. Also, help your kids understand what to watch out for--even if you don't think they're at risk. If Trump was able to enthrall millions of Americans into his cult, obviously making use of their prejudices of course, what does that say about humans? Sure, we need to overcome our prejudices, but we also need to acknowledge our collective weakness, rather than insist that we are better than others and it could never happen to us.

Denis Lagno

Software Engineer

2 个月

From what I understood Trump's reasoning in his refusal of further debates is pretty strong: (1) typical number of presidential debates historically is 3 (three); (2) Trump already did debates with Biden who "passed the torch" to Kamala afterwards; (3) Kamala refused debates with Trump on Fox News; (4) Trump did debates on ABC which was extremely biased and hostile to Trump; (5) this makes total of 3 debates which is typical number of presidential debates historically.

回复

要查看或添加评论,请登录

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了