“I love you.” “I’m sorry.” Phrases like these have become a part of the common lexicon, thrown around now so casually and in jest, that they have become virtually devoid of their original meaning and intent. But words matter. Indulge me, therefore, while I make clear that when I use the word “demagogue,” I am using it according to its proper meaning and context, invoking relatively simple resources like Wikipedia to define “a popular leader, a leader of a mob, a rabble-rouser, a leader in a democracy who gains popularity by exploiting prejudice and ignorance among the common people, whipping up the passions of the crowd and shutting down reasoned deliberation.”
“Demagogues,” according to Wikipedia, “have usually advocated immediate, violent action to address a national crisis while accusing moderate and thoughtful opponents of weakness or disloyalty. Demagogues overturn established customs of political conduct, or promise or threaten to do so. Most who were elected to high office changed their democracy into some form of dictatorship.”
Please, let that last statement sink in for a minute.
Then, in the interest of due diligence as the American patriots that we all should be, and because our great republic will not stand on the rise of a demagogue to the highest office of our nation, we should scrutinize The Demagogue Check List, which I found on a rather obscure site but through which we can all learn how to identify a real demagogue:
- Does he/she inflame passions? Y/N
- Does he/she set group against group? Y/N
- Does he/she have simple answers to complex problems? Y/N
- Does he/she encourage violence against opponents? Y/N
- Does he/she suggest torture and illegal warfare? Y/N
- Does he/she propose mass murder and genocide? Y/N
- Does he/she promise an end to problems? Y/N
- Does he/she scapegoat certain groups, religions or nations as the cause of problems? Y/N
- Does he/she have a grandiose personality style? Y/N
- Does he/she have an authoritarian personality style? Y/N
- Does he/she like to bully? Y/N
- Does he/she ignore basic rules of common courtesy? Y/N
- Does he/she use private security forces like Hitler used the brown shirts? Y/N
- Does he/she show impatience with rules and laws? Y/N
- Does he/she often lie, make things up and exaggerate? Y/N
- Does he/she often insult critics and opponents with crude attacks? Y/N
- Does he/she do things "behind the scenes" that are in contrast with the public image and professed values? Y/N
- Does he/she speak in a theatrical manner designed to incite anger, arouse passions and win allegiance? Y/N
According to my tally, 16 of those 18 questions unequivocally apply to one person in this last presidential election: Donald J. Trump. The remaining two questions (No. 6 and No. 13) don’t — yet. But Trump’s nod to fascist factions within the ranks of his supporters — factions that are typically associated with demagoguery — is patently clear.
The white supremacist Ku Klux Klan openly endorsed Trump’s candidacy and subsequently celebrated his victory. They also celebrated the recent appointment of Steve Bannon — a white nationalist, belonging to the “alt-right” — as senior adviser and chief strategist for Trump’s incoming administration, a position that is reflective of the high esteem in which this movement is regarded by the Trump administration.
“I've said it many times,” wrote New York Daily News journalist Shaun King, an outspoken advocate on race relations known for not mincing his words. “The alt-right movement is simply the KKK without the hoods. They are skinheads with suits and ties. They simply chose a new name, but are fueled by the same hate and the same philosophy as previous white supremacist and Neo-Nazi movements.”
Indeed, Trump’s white nationalist supporters in the alt-right have been emboldened, exultant with their clear ally about to be installed in the White House, one who gives tepid apologies when their ugly rhetoric spills over into the mainstream. The pre-Trump era in America is fading fast. “We’ve crossed the Rubicon in terms of recognition,” said Richard B. Spencer, the leading ideologue of the alt-right movement who takes credit for coining its name.
At a conference of his supporters over the weekend, sponsored by his National Policy Institute, Spencer railed against Jews and quoted Nazi propaganda in German. “America was, until this last generation, a white country designed for ourselves and our posterity,” Spencer said. “It is our creation, it is our inheritance, and it belongs to us.” And as he finished, several audience members proffered the Nazi salute and shouts of, “Heil Trump! Heil our people! Heil victory!” This is the ugly reality of America, post-Trump.
WATCH.
The writing on the wall is so clear that Stevie Wonder could see it. Yet, Trump apologists still claim to distinguish the message from the messenger.
“It’s easy to point to these small, impoverished towns and name racism, the second amendment or plain stupidity as the only reasons why these people would ever vote for a man like Donald Trump,“ wrote Victoria Sanders on her blog, “Tori’s Thought Bubble.” “I find this to be highly intellectually dishonest. ... To write this off as simple racism is to ignore the very real and very heartbreaking struggles small town America faces.”
That may well be true. Despite their mistaken beliefs, however, there will be no return of their old factory jobs as they envision. It was automation that replaced them in manufacturing and on assembly lines, not outsourcing. The use of coal will not rise to bring old jobs back to communities atrophied by a lack of innovation. The market forces against coal are steep because of cheap and abundant natural gas and dramatically falling costs for renewable energies such as solar, wind and geothermal heat. If there are to be new industries to replace the old, the concrete path to creating those 25 million new jobs that Trump has promised them remains unclear with no independent analysis to validate such growth projections.
We should never forget the maxim, “A drowning man clutches a straw.” However, that drowning man still drowns.
People wonder sometimes why the study of history is so important. This is why: History reveals patterns, which give us opportunities to correct error and to perpetuate those ideas that benefit humanity. Allow former Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court David Souter to explain certain patterns of history that foretold the fall of the Roman empire and the things that should ”keep us up at night.” It is prophetic — spooky even to watch now — as we see the rise of the demagogue he warned about four years ago, who would be the product of civic ignorance.
WATCH.
Connecting the predicted rise of a demagogue to civic ignorance is important as it is precisely the predominantly white male demographic, especially those without a college degree, in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana and Wisconsin who, most notably, handed Trump the presidency.
And now that the demagogue Souter predicted is the new president-elect, We, The (reasonable, sensible, sane and pragmatic) People of this great nation must exhaust every legal recourse to stop him.
As I explained in my last piece, Trump may have won the vote to become the president-elect. However, the U.S. Constitution sets out a specific hurdle that must now be passed for him to ascend to the presidency. That will not happen until Dec. 19, 2016, when the 538 members of the Electoral College — whose names appear here, by state, and also here — meet in their respective states to vote for the president.
Founding Father Alexander Hamilton — an influential interpreter and promoter of the U.S. Constitution — explained in Federalist Paper No. 68 the rationale for the establishment of the Electoral College, asserting that it was designed specifically for the kind of predicament in which America now finds itself: to stop a demagogue from becoming president. Two Democratic electors, Michael Baca of Colorado and Bret Chiafalo of Washington state, two patriots calling themselves the Hamilton Electors, are seeking to influence their colleagues in this regard. Theoretically, while these 538 electors have pledged to cast their ballots for the candidate winning the popular vote in their state, they are free to vote as their consciences dictate on behalf of the spirit of America, which believed that this great experiment in democracy could produce the greatest country on this earth, with liberty and justice for all.
“We’re trying to be that ‘break in case of emergency’ fire hose that’s gotten dusty over the last 200 years,” Chiafalo said. “This is an emergency.”
They admit that their campaign is a long shot. But so was Trump’s win. “The biggest criticism we’ve gotten so far is along the lines of, ‘The people have spoken, why don’t you go with the people?’” Bacca said. “But if we did that, then Clinton would be the president. The Constitution is quite clear about what our job is, and that it’s our decision at the end of the day.”
Debate is an important part of the democratic process to select whom among us best represents our interests in Washington. Even after we have voted for a president, the Constitution does not leave us hanging without recourse if our collective voice is threatened, or if there are perceived dangers in the choices that we have made.
There are people who seek to stifle the parts of the Constitution that’s not convenient for them to hear. However, none of us should be here to tow party lines. There is too much at stake in this election. Indeed, this is not George Orwell's "Animal Farm,” where the "lower pigs" become disenfranchised from their voting rights because they refuse to speak up about what they were witnessing with their very eyes. Neither are we the dutiful lambs being led off to the slaughter.
We need to rid ourselves of this notion that, because we disagree on certain principles, we are not united. Or that to speak the truth is denigratory. The truth is what it is. The left wing and right wing of both political parties are attached to the very same eagle. And once that bird takes flight on Jan. 20, 2017, we are all locked in for the ride. Until that time is upon us, the process of debate within the country is not only appropriate but also should — and will — continue. That, my friends, is the process of democracy. That is ultimately what makes the fight worth it. With eyes wide shut, we are already in over our heads. May God bless — and save — America from, and in spite of, herself.