No, Being against Trump Does Not Mean You Hate the White Working Class
A good read.
No, Being against Trump Does Not Mean You Hate the White Working Class
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/434455/donald-trump-white-working-class-what-trumps-defenders-get-wrong
On the language of the leftist elite:
"THE PURPOSIVE INTENTIONALITY OF REJECTING HETERONORMATIVE EXPECTATIONS OF TRADITIONALLY ‘CLEAR’ WRITING IN FAVOR OF LEXICOLOGICAL EXPRESSION WITH THE OPAQUENESS OF PARTICULATE SOIL ON A COLLOIDAL SUSPENSION (A.K.A. WRITING AS CLEAR AS MUD ON PURPOSE)
[...] There is a slice of the Left that really needs very bad writing. Horrid, opaque, impenetrable prose and jargon plays a dual role. First, it makes very dumb or simple ideas sound vastly more sophisticated than they are. Second, it lends an air of authority to very dumb and bad ideas that could not be earned via plain speaking."
"But that’s not true of so many of the armchair social-justice warriors who write nonsensically because the last thing they want is for anyone to make sense of what they’re trying to say. It’s an act, a secret language, a pretense to gnostic status: I can’t understand what they’re saying! They must be geniuses!
I remember when I wrote that 'Orwell’s Orphan’s' G-File, I got deluged with e-mail from angry lefties. (Yes, e-mail. My e-mail box used to be a combination of Twitter, a comments section, a chatroom, and fire-hose enema.) They said that that such writing was necessary for truly complex ideas and if I couldn’t follow along, it was because I lacked the mental sophistication to deal with the Really Big Ideas."
A common tactic of the left. They have been trained to genuinely believe that anyone who disagrees with them can only do so because the person is stupid or evil.
On Trump:
"I’m tempted to say my own response to the charge that my opposition to Trump is motivated by hatred of the white working class is “f*** you.” But I’ll go more highbrow. First, it’s untrue. Second, there’s exactly zero evidence that I have written or said anything of the sort. Third, the notion that my dislike of a politician should be taken as hatred for his supporters, is more than a little cultish and creepy. If Donald Trump is the avatar of your identity and if you mistake him for some kind of secular savior, that’s on you. The misplacement of your self-esteem ain’t my baggage.
No, my objection to Donald Trump is . . . Donald Trump. I think he’s a vain ignoramus and bully who mocks the disabled with a long history of exploiting and abusing the little guy. His instincts are nationalistic and authoritarian, not patriotic and liberty-loving."
"You know what it means when defenders of Donald Trump refuse to defend the actual man Donald Trump? It means he’s indefensible."
"Hugh had a theory about what’s really driving the opposition to Trump. He doesn’t believe that rank-and-file conservatives and Republicans have abandoned conservative principles (and I hope he’s right). He thinks the entire #NeverTrump movement boils down to the border wall. 'The one thing that conservative intellectuals will not embrace is a border fence,' Hugh said. 'They will not do it. They have refused to do it for ten years.'"
"My real problem with Hugh’s theory is that it is a variant of what I discussed above. Rather than take me, [...] at our word for why we oppose Trump, the real reason must be some unstated ulterior motive."
Goldberg misses one other thing. Trump will NEVER enforce the god damned immigration laws! Even if Trump does build the wall, he'll only be doing it as a tribute to himself! Immediately after announcing the wall he said it will have "a big, very beautiful door". Trumpers ignored. He announced he wants what amounts to touchback amnesty. Trumpers ignored. He loves the Visa program, source of 40% of illegals. Trumpers ignore. He hires and defended hiring and importing foreigners for his American hotels, using the excuse Americans don't want the jobs.
I don't JUST want a wall. I WANT THE RULE OF LAW. Trump isn't going to give us that. It's a long con.
No, Being against Trump Does Not Mean You Hate the White Working Class
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/434455/donald-trump-white-working-class-what-trumps-defenders-get-wrong
On the language of the leftist elite:
"THE PURPOSIVE INTENTIONALITY OF REJECTING HETERONORMATIVE EXPECTATIONS OF TRADITIONALLY ‘CLEAR’ WRITING IN FAVOR OF LEXICOLOGICAL EXPRESSION WITH THE OPAQUENESS OF PARTICULATE SOIL ON A COLLOIDAL SUSPENSION (A.K.A. WRITING AS CLEAR AS MUD ON PURPOSE)
[...] There is a slice of the Left that really needs very bad writing. Horrid, opaque, impenetrable prose and jargon plays a dual role. First, it makes very dumb or simple ideas sound vastly more sophisticated than they are. Second, it lends an air of authority to very dumb and bad ideas that could not be earned via plain speaking."
"But that’s not true of so many of the armchair social-justice warriors who write nonsensically because the last thing they want is for anyone to make sense of what they’re trying to say. It’s an act, a secret language, a pretense to gnostic status: I can’t understand what they’re saying! They must be geniuses!
I remember when I wrote that 'Orwell’s Orphan’s' G-File, I got deluged with e-mail from angry lefties. (Yes, e-mail. My e-mail box used to be a combination of Twitter, a comments section, a chatroom, and fire-hose enema.) They said that that such writing was necessary for truly complex ideas and if I couldn’t follow along, it was because I lacked the mental sophistication to deal with the Really Big Ideas."
A common tactic of the left. They have been trained to genuinely believe that anyone who disagrees with them can only do so because the person is stupid or evil.
On Trump:
"I’m tempted to say my own response to the charge that my opposition to Trump is motivated by hatred of the white working class is “f*** you.” But I’ll go more highbrow. First, it’s untrue. Second, there’s exactly zero evidence that I have written or said anything of the sort. Third, the notion that my dislike of a politician should be taken as hatred for his supporters, is more than a little cultish and creepy. If Donald Trump is the avatar of your identity and if you mistake him for some kind of secular savior, that’s on you. The misplacement of your self-esteem ain’t my baggage.
No, my objection to Donald Trump is . . . Donald Trump. I think he’s a vain ignoramus and bully who mocks the disabled with a long history of exploiting and abusing the little guy. His instincts are nationalistic and authoritarian, not patriotic and liberty-loving."
"You know what it means when defenders of Donald Trump refuse to defend the actual man Donald Trump? It means he’s indefensible."
"Hugh had a theory about what’s really driving the opposition to Trump. He doesn’t believe that rank-and-file conservatives and Republicans have abandoned conservative principles (and I hope he’s right). He thinks the entire #NeverTrump movement boils down to the border wall. 'The one thing that conservative intellectuals will not embrace is a border fence,' Hugh said. 'They will not do it. They have refused to do it for ten years.'"
"My real problem with Hugh’s theory is that it is a variant of what I discussed above. Rather than take me, [...] at our word for why we oppose Trump, the real reason must be some unstated ulterior motive."
Goldberg misses one other thing. Trump will NEVER enforce the god damned immigration laws! Even if Trump does build the wall, he'll only be doing it as a tribute to himself! Immediately after announcing the wall he said it will have "a big, very beautiful door". Trumpers ignored. He announced he wants what amounts to touchback amnesty. Trumpers ignored. He loves the Visa program, source of 40% of illegals. Trumpers ignore. He hires and defended hiring and importing foreigners for his American hotels, using the excuse Americans don't want the jobs.
I don't JUST want a wall. I WANT THE RULE OF LAW. Trump isn't going to give us that. It's a long con.