I agree with virtually everything you wrote. However: "There’s a reality here and that’s the shame that should be aimed at the lazy voters who listened to this guy tell them destruction and chaos was ahead and then elected him." - With this I disagree.
No, I very much would have preferred those voters not to vote as they did. However, I can understand why they did or, at least, why the majority of them did. Those people were hurting. Those people were and are among the section of the population which gains least benefit from a materialistic society which socialises them to applaud capitalism and to see success as defined by wealth, status, power and fame.
Trump didn't tell them that "destruction and chaos" were ahead for them but rather that he'd "drain the swamp." The destruction and chaos he spoke of was supposed to be what would be experienced by those that he claimed where not doing right by the nation or its population, in particular those, mostly blue collar, low status white collar workers or the unemployed.
Yes, far too many of them fell for his confidence trick but that is not surprising. As well as what I've pointed out above, those voters were predominantly not well educated, certainly not versed in research, finance, analysis, argument or other factors that would have allowed them to make sound judgments about either Trump or what is actually the cause of their situation.
So, no, I don't agree that the majority of these people were "lazy voters" - deluded, misguided, manipulated, some ignorant, abused and used, yes - I could agree with those descriptions. If anyone eligible to vote could be. justifiably deemed "lazy", I suggest it is those that *did not turn out and cast a vote*, for if they had, I believe that the result would be different. However, even those non-voters could probably be excused for being either apathetic or simply disgusted at the state of the political system and wanting nothing to do with it. I don't agree with that stance but I think that, just as with most who voted for Trump, it is understandable.
In both cases, I also think that the behaviour, whilst not palatable to many of us, if we choose not to blame but rather to reason, then we can only agree that it was reasonable, even if unfortunate.
After all, isn't that the sort of behaviour which initially promotes most tyrants into power and often keeps them there?
Brilliant as always, Martin. But, oh, it's about to get worse (economically). Read about Section 899 in "The Big Beautiful Bill", aka The Mar-a-Lago Accord.
At 76 I'm with you. Keep meditating, writing and shouting out LOUD
Good stuff as usual Martin!
I agree with virtually everything you wrote. However: "There’s a reality here and that’s the shame that should be aimed at the lazy voters who listened to this guy tell them destruction and chaos was ahead and then elected him." - With this I disagree.
No, I very much would have preferred those voters not to vote as they did. However, I can understand why they did or, at least, why the majority of them did. Those people were hurting. Those people were and are among the section of the population which gains least benefit from a materialistic society which socialises them to applaud capitalism and to see success as defined by wealth, status, power and fame.
Trump didn't tell them that "destruction and chaos" were ahead for them but rather that he'd "drain the swamp." The destruction and chaos he spoke of was supposed to be what would be experienced by those that he claimed where not doing right by the nation or its population, in particular those, mostly blue collar, low status white collar workers or the unemployed.
Yes, far too many of them fell for his confidence trick but that is not surprising. As well as what I've pointed out above, those voters were predominantly not well educated, certainly not versed in research, finance, analysis, argument or other factors that would have allowed them to make sound judgments about either Trump or what is actually the cause of their situation.
So, no, I don't agree that the majority of these people were "lazy voters" - deluded, misguided, manipulated, some ignorant, abused and used, yes - I could agree with those descriptions. If anyone eligible to vote could be. justifiably deemed "lazy", I suggest it is those that *did not turn out and cast a vote*, for if they had, I believe that the result would be different. However, even those non-voters could probably be excused for being either apathetic or simply disgusted at the state of the political system and wanting nothing to do with it. I don't agree with that stance but I think that, just as with most who voted for Trump, it is understandable.
In both cases, I also think that the behaviour, whilst not palatable to many of us, if we choose not to blame but rather to reason, then we can only agree that it was reasonable, even if unfortunate.
After all, isn't that the sort of behaviour which initially promotes most tyrants into power and often keeps them there?
Brilliant as always, Martin. But, oh, it's about to get worse (economically). Read about Section 899 in "The Big Beautiful Bill", aka The Mar-a-Lago Accord.
https://www.theissue.io/the-world-after-the-mar-a-lago-plan-or-macroeconomic-regime-change/