Untitled. Morality. Maybe. United States. World. Election. Wtf? Idk? Being Human?

I’m not sure what to call this post. I started thinking about Trump. And then I started thinking about what my impression of Trump has been pretty much my whole life, which has never been favorable. I’ve never had a good impression of Trump since he has been involved in my awareness through life. He’s from A very wealthy family, and every media thing I can remember about him has shown him to be a moron and an idiot in my opinion. Even his show “the apprentice” Was just entertaining because he was such a moron. It wasn’t that he is such a great boss or such a great executive. It’s because he was an idiot. That’s why people love that show. It was because he’s a complete moron, who acts like a baby who acts like he’s a confident grown man.

OK. So now you know where I stand on Trump. So my question going into this post was or is: how can people see anything good in this guy?

I think that’s the main mind blowing experience that we in America, if not the world, I have been having about Trump being elected president. It literally is as though what I saw as just human and just common sense, was nonsense. It was literally as if I had been transported into an alien world.

We all react to it in different ways. For sure. But in the end, we have to come to terms with that indeed maybe 40% of the United States likes him as a president. We have to reconcile that truth and we have to except it and we have to understand it. And Deal with it. No matter how incredible it is.

*

I don’t know what to title this post because it’s not really about Trump, but as soon as I say Trump then everyone’s going to have their attitudes about it.

But it is kind of about Trump in so much as why would people like him as a president. It seems that the people I’ve talked to who are Trump supporters, which isn’t very many, granted, Personally I think I know as friends for people, but then I have friends who also know Trump supporters and so I’ve heard kind of secondhand the opinions through them, again, which is probably a little bit skewed. But that’s what I got.

Someone can correct me if I’m wrong. 

It seems to me that people who support trump see him as a type of human being of which we all are, which is to say, self-centered, don’t really want to hurt anybody, have their own opinion, feel that humanity is what we’re concerned with and not really anything else, for example, we’re not really worried about some abstract concepts like “the world”.  and that human beings are fallible. That regardless of what opinions we have, we all make mistakes, we all have attitudes that probably aren’t the best, we all do things that are, for a better word, human.

And I wonder if this is why people voted for Trump and like trump. I wonder if just upon feeling accused they start to bring in policy and character, for example, he just speaks his mind. I wonder, though, if it’s really because the people who vote for him see in him themselves, which is to say as a human being. And nothing more. They don’t expect him to have any standard of morality, because they themselves don’t want to have to answer to anyone else about their opinions on morality. They don’t really account for his character except to say that he has his own opinions, because they themselves don’t want to have to account for why their opinions should have any moral substance besides their own opinions. In short, the people that probably think the least so far is intellectually about themselves and the world around us, if I can totally stereotype and overgeneralize there, are the people that hang onto the idea of “human” as a particularly abstract concept in its largest and greatest sense. Perhaps as Trump supporters they want their humanity to be untouched, and not critiqued, they don’t want to have to have any insight or justify their behavior is in any way. They see the system of the United States as ultimately about the individual, and ultimately that when it comes down to it the individuals should be left to themselves, and not questioned except so far as a leader can help other individuals to make money so they can go water skiing so they can have a house over their head so they can raise their children. Any other considerations, maybe, they don’t see as concerning government, but particularly only being a human being citizen of the United States.

—- please tell me what you think of that analysis.

Because, on the other hand, I think what won out, the people that live in the cities primarily, the people that have to interact with difference every moment of their lives, the people that prevailed in this election, are the people who do want to be questioned or at least are used to it, who do want to be insightful, who do you want to encounter other than us and feel uncomfortable and being challenged and do consider vital components of governance having to do with character and the world and these concepts that seems so abstract, but yet are so concrete and real in our daily lives.  

Author: landzek

My name is Lance Kair, a philosopher, a counselor and a musician who is being questioned.

14 thoughts on “Untitled. Morality. Maybe. United States. World. Election. Wtf? Idk? Being Human?”

  1. But so far as the economy and Covid call and yes I don’t think any president could’ve done better directly, but I think someone could’ve done a lot better with leading the country through these uncertain times. Trump provided no leader ship whatsoever even to the point of resorting to his mega defensive position against people critiquing him to say that the disease doesn’t exist or that were defeating it. That is just blatant having zero insight into one’s own person. So far as the economy though, I don’t think an acting president really does very much for the economy that we see until five or 10 years later. I think it’s just a fantasy that we believe in that an acting president is actually doing something to help or worse in the economy

  2. I’m walking my dog now, so I want to comment on your policy comments. If you just want to get down to policy.

    “I think that President Trump’s approach to the abortion issue is more likely to position us to stand up for both women and children more effectively.”
    even though my Catholic University that I’m attending just put out a statement commanding in organization that they are involved with, but then also reaffirming that the Catholic church‘s position on abortion is that rights to being a human being start from conception, I disagree with you here. But, I respect your right to be involved with people similar to you right to choose to force a mother to have a child that they may not want to have. I respect that once a child arises within them other than the mothers rights disappear. Lol. But if it has to do with me and the women that I love, I will respect that they have a right to abort that pregnancy.

    “think that moves that he has made to promote relations between Israel and other middle eastern states has increased stability in that part of the world.”
    I don’t know too much about that. Personally, who cares if we’re promoting good relations between Israel and anyone else anymore then we’re promoting good relations between Ethiopia and anyone else or Australia or anyone else.

    I “ think that his dealings with Iran have been more effective than the last administration’s and have promoted stability in the middle east.
    I think that his dealings with North Korea have been more effective than the last administration’s.”
    I disagree.

    I “think that his dealings with China have represented a wiser response than the previous administrations’ to the way China is acting in the world.
    I think that his actions over the last 3+ years represent a more sound approach to promoting a strong economy than the last “administration’s.”
    I just agree there two.

  3. I think that President Trump’s approach to the abortion issue is more likely to position us to stand up for both women and children more effectively.

    I think that moves that he has made to promote relations between Israel and other middle eastern states has increased stability in that part of the world.

    I think that his dealings with Iran have been more effective than the last administration’s and have promoted stability in the middle east.

    I think that his dealings with North Korea have been more effective than the last administration’s.

    I think that his dealings with China have represented a wiser response than the previous administrations’ to the way China is acting in the world.

    I think that his actions over the last 3+ years represent a more sound approach to promoting a strong economy than the last administration’s.

    I think he has made moves that have been demonstrably good for America’s diverse population (ex: historically good employment numbers for Latino and black people).

    I think that accusations against him regarding collusion with Russia and political underhandedness with Ukraine were baseless, and even fraudulent.

    I don’t think Joe Biden’s response to covid19 would have been better than Donald Trump’s.

    I voted for Donald Trump.

    I won’t invite him over to my house to teach my kids how to be polite to people, but I voted for him.

    1. Yes, I agree with some of your saying here. But it’s exactly why I wouldn’t invite him over also. That’s exactly my point here. I’m wondering if people who voted for Trump see “human being” as this kind of untouchable ethically reserved as a space where politics and government is not supposed to touch. Whereas I also wonder if the people that voted for Biden, the people that live in the cities, the people that encounter multicultural’s all the time, are constantly having to deal with “other nurse” are the ones that don’t reserve this individual space and that are asking the government to kind of give us a model of how human beings in themselves should behave.

      The old ideal out that there is this sacred space of being human and that government shouldn’t touch it, I don’t know if that is really a legitimate proposal any more in such a world of population density. And it could be argued that Covid itself has arisen because of the population density. Not because of some random act of God or something like that. So that’s really what I’m saying in this post. I’m just pondering how could such a moron, as a person, be elected how could people like him. And like I said people that reserve the human being as the sacred space tend to point more to his policies and allow him the space to be an infallible human being who doesn’t want to hurt anyone even as he groped women’s pussies and talks about people of color as if they’re stupid or less then.

      To me it shows that he is a kind of human being that I don’t want representing me. I am from more personally the side that “God is with me”. And then I’m going to be OK. I don’t live in fear. In my opinion trumps whole presents is based in the fear of someone coming into that sacred space that he caused a human being. Or I should say of government infringing upon that. Where is I don’t think there is a sacred space, human being. I think the human being is a space that is constantly negotiated with different ness and other ness. And it seems to me, the people in America who live in a place where they don’t Encounter very much difference, are the ones who want to all pulled the sacred space of the human being that the government is not supposed to touch or say anything about. And I wonder if it’s because such people do not really have any basis upon why the morality or why they are in the world should be the case except again to resort to some reserved sacred space of individuality.

      1. …Really, it seems to me that there are two fundamental orientations upon what it is to be an individual. Personally, I think to be an individual means to be in a space of other people who are informing me who I am. Other peoples ideas of individually are more abstract, is if I am an individual quote with a soul” or “in heaven”. Despite my interactions with other people. As if there’s a bunch of people that just hang out together and they never affect each other. And I think when we view the constitution of the United States, people read “individualism“ and government from two different orientations upon what it actually means to be a human being.

        But the people voted for the definition, effectively, where the human being arises in the negotiation with other people, and that we need to respect that.

      2. But yes. Hello Dave. I do agree with some of your things about his policy. But I don’t think I’m voting for policy only, as if there’s this reserve space of being human. I think I’m voting for who represents me best and then also what policies they are able to bring about.

        In my whole life I’ve never ever thought of Donald Trump in some sort a neutral human being kind of way. I always saw him as a spoiled rich brat who is stupid. So there is my bias lol.

      3. I don’t see how what you are saying would have helped me on November 3. As I considered the human beings, Trump and Pence, and the human beings, Biden and Harris, the human beings I decided to vote for were Trump and Pence.

        Did I miss something about their human being-ness that should have made me vote differently?

      4. And, I’m not saying that somethings wrong with you because you voted for Trump. I’m just trying to come to terms with how people could vote for Trump because it seems so incredible to me.

        I’m trying to come to terms with some thing that just seems inconceivable to me.

        But yet there it is. And so I am putting forth an explanation of perhaps why there has been such a deep seeded division in America. I’m saying that maybe there are two fundamental ways of how people conceptualize what a human being is and what government is supposed to do.

        And then as my post says.

        It seems to me, and I’m just saying it appears to me this way. If it’s not the case, then I want to hear some ways that people are seeing things that I’m not seeing things. Like I said in my post. It seems to me that perhaps people that don’t live where they’re constantly involved with people who are different than them, maybe people who live in such areas who thus see life through that lens of sameness, perhaps they are the ones that vote for Trump because Trump’s position as a person is that no one has the right to indict my humanity. Which is exactly how Trump reacts to any disagreement; as if a person isn’t dating him as a human being.

        Whereas, maybe people who live in places such as cities, who encounter people that are different from them every moment of their lives. People who have to contend with different beliefs systems, different appearances, people who basically our indicted to their human being nervous as soon as I step out into the street. People who are used to being challenged about their beliefs and ideals, people who see difference in encounter difference every day, maybe those are the people that voted for Biden because he approaches humanity from a standpoint of compassion and understanding and working together despite differences.

        Maybe there’s just two fundamental ways of viewing what is happening in the United States and the world. On one hand, maybe there are people that just don’t encounter difference in their daily lives. And they can’t understand what difference actually appears as.

        And then there is maybe there’s people who encounter difference all the time, difference is always in their face, and so they’re used to it. And maybe these people can’t understand why people who don’t encounter difference seems so obstinate and insecure.

        I don’t think it really has to do with the policies that each candidate was putting forth. Because we’re so divided about what it is to be human and our relationship with government, that the policies just are not really recognized perhaps. Such that the talk about policies back-and-forth just kind of go past each other and we really don’t even hear anything about or see anything about what is actually happening with the policies because we are so infatuated with things that are offending our innate sense of self and what we consider being human.


    2. I think that accusations against him regarding collusion with Russia and political underhandedness with Ukraine were baseless, and even fraudulent. “

      I think the question was legitimate though. And the investigation should have Ben allowed. But again, Trump is so insecure and defensive, he appeared as if he had something to hide. And that just made some thing that may have been a week investigation, a relatively simple task, last even further taking more and more time, energy, and made people even more worried that he was trying to cover something up. Trump has no insight into who he is and doesn’t feel that he hast to justify himself to anyone ever. I don’t want a leader. like that. He created and aggravated problems where there weren’t any just because he has no insight into how he is and blames everyone else for attacking him .

    3. “I think he has made moves that have been demonstrably good for America’s diverse population (ex: historically good employment numbers for Latino and black people).”

      I disagree. I don’t think the president affects the economy as much as we think that presidents do. I think it’s more market driven and I think that presidential policies did not ultimately proactively do anything, they are always reactive, and that’s why every president claims that they’ve done well for the economy, but really what it was was the previous presidents term that affected it.

  4. As Freud had said, ‘Every normal person, in fact, is only normal on the average. His ego approximates to that of the psychotic in some part or other and to a greater or lesser extent’. 😉

  5. Trump, the accidental puer aeternus or Tarot’s Fool. This is where I enjoyed Jungian psychology, the metaphoric parallels. Trump is not a puer aeternus in the typical sense of being an eternal boy, which is to retain a certain joie de vivre. He’s the other type, the Fool—think Forrest Gump. Think Dunning-Kruger.

    He has no idea how gormless and feckless he is. Trump is the consummate confidence man. To give him credit where due—unlike Gump—he pushes hard to get what he gets. What’s lost on him is that he’d have been richer—until he become president—if he’d invested in an unmanaged S&P 500 index fund. He’s inept as a businessman or executive (including president), yet he’s the consummate gaslight storyteller. And I believe he believes what he says.

    Echoing an argument I make against Neil Gaiman and dragons, saying he’s successful doesn’t make him successful. Claiming an IQ of 160 at not point makes it so when it’s measured closer to 100. (I am not defending IQs here—just trying to make a point.)

    Much of your questioning reflects our conversation on authenticity. Are Trump’s actions authentic, which is to say what he wants to do without being over-affected by society? How is this different to a sociopath?

    1. my answer is that there is no “common humanity”. That there are types. in this way, definition is insufficient to convey a meaning across categories, as I say, “there is no traversal across a common category”. He is human only in a convention sense, in a sense which connotes which players we have to abide by certain rules with.
      Yet, I only use those terms in the context of counseling. Philosphically, I am not sure there is an “authentic human”, for exactly the reason you give: we are really all sociopaths. lol. but with the caveat that “some” of us sociopaths are pathologically narcissist in the sense that there are larger more important things to consider, and this consideration is particular to the individual, al be it, pathologically. lol

      Philosphically speaking, I concur with the ancheint (what was it called?). the Mahabarahta? the story of Arjuna. Krisna showing his the truth of the real encounter: that people are all caught in their own ways, and that his is but to enjoin his own, and to battle his family members.

      Trump is a condition of reality. his Being can only have a possibility of being “authentic” when he comes into my therapy room and wants help,. Until that moment, he resides in a space of the unknown part of the world in which being just do what they do, just as I have to do also. there is no accounting for it except in the manner that I account for it. The idea that various people might be “authentic” a non-sequitur in my philosophical context. But not in my counseling context. lol. how’s that?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s